hypothesis stringlengths 11 177 | context stringlengths 0 2.71k | hypothesis_formula stringlengths 3 35 | context_formula stringlengths 0 865 | proofs list | proof_label stringclasses 3
values | proofs_formula list | world_assump_label stringclasses 3
values | original_tree_depth int64 1 4 | depth int64 1 3 ⌀ | num_formula_distractors int64 0 22 | num_translation_distractors int64 0 0 | num_all_distractors int64 0 22 | negative_hypothesis stringlengths 15 158 ⌀ | 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 99 2.85k | proof_serial stringlengths 11 654 | version stringclasses 1
value | premise stringlengths 0 188 | assumptions list | paraphrased_premises list | paraphrased_premise stringlengths 0 753 | assumption stringlengths 0 200 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
the fact that the wobbler is not conspicuous but it swoops pastorale does not hold. | sent1: that the sodium does not weaken is true. sent2: the fact that something is antiapartheid and it is a kind of a powdered is not correct if it is not aecial. sent3: if the puttyroot does not evaporate then the fact that the binder does overflow and it fronts is false. sent4: the pilgrim is not passionate. sent5: t... | ¬(¬{B}{aa} & {A}{aa}) | sent1: ¬{P}{g} sent2: (x): ¬{R}x -> ¬({O}x & {Q}x) sent3: ¬{D}{b} -> ¬({E}{a} & {C}{a}) sent4: ¬{AB}{ej} sent5: ({FE}{fn} & ¬{CI}{fn}) sent6: (x): ¬{R}x sent7: (x): (¬{M}x & {N}x) -> ¬{L}x sent8: {A}{aa} sent9: ({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa} sent10: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{D}x sent11: {H}{c} -> ({G}{b} v ¬{F}{b}) sent12: (x... | [
"sent16 -> int1: if the wobbler is both a axiology and not passionate then it is not conspicuous.; int1 & sent22 -> int2: the wobbler is not conspicuous.; int2 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent16 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; int1 & sent22 -> int2: ¬{B}{aa}; int2 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 21 | 0 | 21 | the bedpost is not grapelike but it is a Navaho. | (¬{K}{ef} & {FJ}{ef}) | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the wobbler is not conspicuous but it swoops pastorale does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the sodium does not weaken is true. sent2: the fact that something is antiapartheid and it is a kind of a powdered is not correct if it is not aecial. sent3: if the puttyroot does not evaporate t... | sent16 -> int1: if the wobbler is both a axiology and not passionate then it is not conspicuous.; int1 & sent22 -> int2: the wobbler is not conspicuous.; int2 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | something is not conspicuous if it is a kind of a axiology and it is not passionate. | [
"the wobbler is a kind of a axiology but it is not passionate.",
"the wobbler does swoop pastorale."
] | [
"It is not noticeable if it is not passionate.",
"It is not noticeable if it is a kind of axiology and not passionate."
] | It is not noticeable if it is a kind of axiology and not passionate. | the wobbler does swoop pastorale. |
the foreground does not speak iodination. | sent1: the mallow is not a Purcell. sent2: if the mallow is a Purcell or not a bioweapon or both the foreground does not dodge Donatism. sent3: the foreground does not speak mallow if it is not unconscientious. sent4: if the foreground does not dodge Donatism that it speaks iodination and/or is not a Purcell is not fal... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: ({A}{a} v ¬{AA}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent3: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬{E}{b} sent4: ¬{AB}{b} -> ({B}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent5: (x): {C}x -> {A}x sent6: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {C}x) sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent9: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent10: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent11: ¬{A}{a... | [
"sent8 & sent1 -> int1: the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent8 & sent1 -> int1: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | the foreground speaks iodination. | {B}{b} | 6 | [
"sent9 -> int2: the foreground speaks iodination if it is a kind of a Purcell.; sent5 -> int3: if the foreground is a Aeolian it is a kind of a Purcell.; sent7 -> int4: if the foreground does not speak mallow then it recruits mischief and it is a Aeolian.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the foreground does not speak iodination. ; $context$ = sent1: the mallow is not a Purcell. sent2: if the mallow is a Purcell or not a bioweapon or both the foreground does not dodge Donatism. sent3: the foreground does not speak mallow if it is not unconscientious. sent4: if the foreground does not dodg... | sent8 & sent1 -> int1: the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both if it is not a Purcell. | [
"the mallow is not a Purcell.",
"the foreground does not speak iodination if the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both."
] | [
"If the mallow is a bio weapon, it does not dodge Donatism or both.",
"If the mallow is a bioweapon, it does not dodge Donatism or both."
] | If the mallow is a bio weapon, it does not dodge Donatism or both. | the mallow is not a Purcell. |
the foreground does not speak iodination. | sent1: the mallow is not a Purcell. sent2: if the mallow is a Purcell or not a bioweapon or both the foreground does not dodge Donatism. sent3: the foreground does not speak mallow if it is not unconscientious. sent4: if the foreground does not dodge Donatism that it speaks iodination and/or is not a Purcell is not fal... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: ¬{A}{a} sent2: ({A}{a} v ¬{AA}{a}) -> ¬{AB}{b} sent3: ¬{F}{b} -> ¬{E}{b} sent4: ¬{AB}{b} -> ({B}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent5: (x): {C}x -> {A}x sent6: {D}{b} -> {C}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{E}x -> ({D}x & {C}x) sent8: ¬{A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent9: (x): {A}x -> {B}x sent10: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent11: ¬{A}{a... | [
"sent8 & sent1 -> int1: the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent8 & sent1 -> int1: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | the foreground speaks iodination. | {B}{b} | 6 | [
"sent9 -> int2: the foreground speaks iodination if it is a kind of a Purcell.; sent5 -> int3: if the foreground is a Aeolian it is a kind of a Purcell.; sent7 -> int4: if the foreground does not speak mallow then it recruits mischief and it is a Aeolian.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the foreground does not speak iodination. ; $context$ = sent1: the mallow is not a Purcell. sent2: if the mallow is a Purcell or not a bioweapon or both the foreground does not dodge Donatism. sent3: the foreground does not speak mallow if it is not unconscientious. sent4: if the foreground does not dodg... | sent8 & sent1 -> int1: the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both.; int1 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both if it is not a Purcell. | [
"the mallow is not a Purcell.",
"the foreground does not speak iodination if the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both."
] | [
"If the mallow is a bio weapon, it does not dodge Donatism or both.",
"If the mallow is a bioweapon, it does not dodge Donatism or both."
] | If the mallow is a bioweapon, it does not dodge Donatism or both. | the foreground does not speak iodination if the mallow is a bioweapon or it does not dodge Donatism or both. |
that the diesel-hydraulic is not non-existential but a Zweig is wrong. | sent1: that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect. sent2: the diesel-hydraulic is not a kind of a zone. sent3: something that does not recruit Westminster is existential. sent4: something is a misogynist. sent5: the diesel-hydraulic is not fractional. sent6: the diesel-hydraulic does... | ¬({C}{a} & {D}{a}) | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent2: ¬{F}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{E}x -> {C}x sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: ¬{FS}{a} sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: ¬{HC}{dg} -> {JA}{dg} sent8: ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) sent9: (Ex): {D}x sent10: (x): {D}x -> ¬{HA}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the diesel-hydraulic does not attach.; sent1 -> int2: if the diesel-hydraulic does not attach then it is existential.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the diesel-hydraulic is existential.; sent8 -> int4: the diesel-hydraulic is a Zweig.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent1 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; sent8 -> int4: {D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the diesel-hydraulic is not non-existential but a Zweig is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect. sent2: the diesel-hydraulic is not a kind of a zone. sent3: something that does not recruit Westminster is existential. sent4: someth... | sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the diesel-hydraulic does not attach.; sent1 -> int2: if the diesel-hydraulic does not attach then it is existential.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the diesel-hydraulic is existential.; sent8 -> int4: the diesel-hydraulic is a Zweig.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | something is a misogynist. | [
"the diesel-hydraulic does not attach if there is something such that it is a misogynist.",
"that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect.",
"the diesel-hydraulic is a kind of a Zweig and it recruits Westminster."
] | [
"Something is a misogynist.",
"Someone is a misogynist.",
"Something is misogynist."
] | Something is a misogynist. | the diesel-hydraulic does not attach if there is something such that it is a misogynist. |
that the diesel-hydraulic is not non-existential but a Zweig is wrong. | sent1: that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect. sent2: the diesel-hydraulic is not a kind of a zone. sent3: something that does not recruit Westminster is existential. sent4: something is a misogynist. sent5: the diesel-hydraulic is not fractional. sent6: the diesel-hydraulic does... | ¬({C}{a} & {D}{a}) | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent2: ¬{F}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{E}x -> {C}x sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: ¬{FS}{a} sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: ¬{HC}{dg} -> {JA}{dg} sent8: ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) sent9: (Ex): {D}x sent10: (x): {D}x -> ¬{HA}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the diesel-hydraulic does not attach.; sent1 -> int2: if the diesel-hydraulic does not attach then it is existential.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the diesel-hydraulic is existential.; sent8 -> int4: the diesel-hydraulic is a Zweig.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent1 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; sent8 -> int4: {D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the diesel-hydraulic is not non-existential but a Zweig is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect. sent2: the diesel-hydraulic is not a kind of a zone. sent3: something that does not recruit Westminster is existential. sent4: someth... | sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the diesel-hydraulic does not attach.; sent1 -> int2: if the diesel-hydraulic does not attach then it is existential.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the diesel-hydraulic is existential.; sent8 -> int4: the diesel-hydraulic is a Zweig.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | something is a misogynist. | [
"the diesel-hydraulic does not attach if there is something such that it is a misogynist.",
"that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect.",
"the diesel-hydraulic is a kind of a Zweig and it recruits Westminster."
] | [
"Something is a misogynist.",
"Someone is a misogynist.",
"Something is misogynist."
] | Someone is a misogynist. | that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect. |
that the diesel-hydraulic is not non-existential but a Zweig is wrong. | sent1: that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect. sent2: the diesel-hydraulic is not a kind of a zone. sent3: something that does not recruit Westminster is existential. sent4: something is a misogynist. sent5: the diesel-hydraulic is not fractional. sent6: the diesel-hydraulic does... | ¬({C}{a} & {D}{a}) | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent2: ¬{F}{a} sent3: (x): ¬{E}x -> {C}x sent4: (Ex): {A}x sent5: ¬{FS}{a} sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{B}{a} sent7: ¬{HC}{dg} -> {JA}{dg} sent8: ({D}{a} & {E}{a}) sent9: (Ex): {D}x sent10: (x): {D}x -> ¬{HA}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the diesel-hydraulic does not attach.; sent1 -> int2: if the diesel-hydraulic does not attach then it is existential.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the diesel-hydraulic is existential.; sent8 -> int4: the diesel-hydraulic is a Zweig.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent1 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: {C}{a}; sent8 -> int4: {D}{a}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the diesel-hydraulic is not non-existential but a Zweig is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect. sent2: the diesel-hydraulic is not a kind of a zone. sent3: something that does not recruit Westminster is existential. sent4: someth... | sent4 & sent6 -> int1: the diesel-hydraulic does not attach.; sent1 -> int2: if the diesel-hydraulic does not attach then it is existential.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the diesel-hydraulic is existential.; sent8 -> int4: the diesel-hydraulic is a Zweig.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | something is a misogynist. | [
"the diesel-hydraulic does not attach if there is something such that it is a misogynist.",
"that something is existential hold if that it does not attach is not incorrect.",
"the diesel-hydraulic is a kind of a Zweig and it recruits Westminster."
] | [
"Something is a misogynist.",
"Someone is a misogynist.",
"Something is misogynist."
] | Something is misogynist. | the diesel-hydraulic is a kind of a Zweig and it recruits Westminster. |
if the strip is not lesser then the fact that the Uniat is a kind of absolutist thing that is not a synonymy is wrong. | ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) | [
"void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Uniat is a kind of absolutist thing that is not a kind of a synonymy.; assump2 -> int1: something is an absolutist but it is not a kind of a synonymy.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); assump2 -> int1: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x);"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = if the strip is not lesser then the fact that the Uniat is a kind of absolutist thing that is not a synonymy is wrong. ; $context$ = ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | [
""
] | [
""
] | |||||
the fact that the plonk is a teammate that is bismuthic does not hold. | sent1: if there is something such that the fact that it is non-anthropometric thing that does not recruit waterproofing is incorrect then the conformist is neuromuscular. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it is either non-minimal or not non-bismuthic or both is not correct the answer is not a teammat... | ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}{b} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}{aa} sent3: (Ex): {EF}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> {C}{a} sent5: (Ex): (¬{CE}x v {AF}x) sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬{I}{d} -> ({G}{c} & {H}{c}) sent8: ¬{AB}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬{CH}x sent10: ¬{I}{d} sent11: ¬{A}{aa} sent12: (x): {D}x -> {A}x sen... | [
"sent6 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not minimal or a tyrannosaur or both does not hold.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the plonk does not swoop horsebean.; sent17 -> int3: if the plonk does not swoop horsebean then it is a teammate and it is bismuthic.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x); int1 & sent16 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; sent17 -> int3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({C}{a} & {B}{a}); int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 | the fact that the plonk is both a teammate and not non-bismuthic is not true. | ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) | 8 | [
"sent12 -> int4: that the conformist swoops horsebean is correct if it is neuromuscular.; sent13 -> int5: if the necker is not non-neoplastic the fact that it is non-anthropometric thing that does not recruit waterproofing is not true.; sent7 & sent10 -> int6: the necker is neoplastic and it is fertile.; int6 -> in... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the plonk is a teammate that is bismuthic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that the fact that it is non-anthropometric thing that does not recruit waterproofing is incorrect then the conformist is neuromuscular. sent2: if there is something such that the fact t... | sent6 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not minimal or a tyrannosaur or both does not hold.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the plonk does not swoop horsebean.; sent17 -> int3: if the plonk does not swoop horsebean then it is a teammate and it is bismuthic.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the answer is not minimal or it is a tyrannosaur or both is not correct. | [
"the plonk does not swoop horsebean if there exists something such that that it is not minimal and/or it is a tyrannosaur is not correct.",
"if that something does not swoop horsebean hold then it is a teammate and it is bismuthic."
] | [
"The answer is either a tyrannosaur or not.",
"The answer is not minimal or it is a tyrannosaur."
] | The answer is either a tyrannosaur or not. | the plonk does not swoop horsebean if there exists something such that that it is not minimal and/or it is a tyrannosaur is not correct. |
the fact that the plonk is a teammate that is bismuthic does not hold. | sent1: if there is something such that the fact that it is non-anthropometric thing that does not recruit waterproofing is incorrect then the conformist is neuromuscular. sent2: if there is something such that the fact that it is either non-minimal or not non-bismuthic or both is not correct the answer is not a teammat... | ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: (x): ¬(¬{E}x & ¬{F}x) -> {D}{b} sent2: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x v {B}x) -> ¬{C}{aa} sent3: (Ex): {EF}x sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> {C}{a} sent5: (Ex): (¬{CE}x v {AF}x) sent6: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent7: ¬{I}{d} -> ({G}{c} & {H}{c}) sent8: ¬{AB}{aa} sent9: (Ex): ¬{CH}x sent10: ¬{I}{d} sent11: ¬{A}{aa} sent12: (x): {D}x -> {A}x sen... | [
"sent6 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not minimal or a tyrannosaur or both does not hold.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the plonk does not swoop horsebean.; sent17 -> int3: if the plonk does not swoop horsebean then it is a teammate and it is bismuthic.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x); int1 & sent16 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; sent17 -> int3: ¬{A}{a} -> ({C}{a} & {B}{a}); int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 16 | 0 | 16 | the fact that the plonk is both a teammate and not non-bismuthic is not true. | ¬({C}{a} & {B}{a}) | 8 | [
"sent12 -> int4: that the conformist swoops horsebean is correct if it is neuromuscular.; sent13 -> int5: if the necker is not non-neoplastic the fact that it is non-anthropometric thing that does not recruit waterproofing is not true.; sent7 & sent10 -> int6: the necker is neoplastic and it is fertile.; int6 -> in... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the plonk is a teammate that is bismuthic does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that the fact that it is non-anthropometric thing that does not recruit waterproofing is incorrect then the conformist is neuromuscular. sent2: if there is something such that the fact t... | sent6 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is not minimal or a tyrannosaur or both does not hold.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: the plonk does not swoop horsebean.; sent17 -> int3: if the plonk does not swoop horsebean then it is a teammate and it is bismuthic.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | that the answer is not minimal or it is a tyrannosaur or both is not correct. | [
"the plonk does not swoop horsebean if there exists something such that that it is not minimal and/or it is a tyrannosaur is not correct.",
"if that something does not swoop horsebean hold then it is a teammate and it is bismuthic."
] | [
"The answer is either a tyrannosaur or not.",
"The answer is not minimal or it is a tyrannosaur."
] | The answer is not minimal or it is a tyrannosaur. | if that something does not swoop horsebean hold then it is a teammate and it is bismuthic. |
the Palatinate is iconic. | sent1: the Palatinate does not upload if that that the Capricorn does upload and it is algal is not right is correct. sent2: the Palatinate is nondeductible. sent3: something is not a kind of a consulate and is not iconic if it is expressible. sent4: the Palatinate is not iconic if the Alka-seltzer scavenges. sent5: th... | {B}{a} | sent1: ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: {AB}{a} sent3: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{B}x) sent4: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: ({C}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent9: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) | [
"sent8 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and is not nondeductible is wrong if the Alka-seltzer does not upload hold.; sent7 -> int2: the Alka-seltzer does not upload.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible is not right.; int3 &... | DISPROVED | [
"sent8 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent7 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int3 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the Palatinate does not upload. | ¬{A}{a} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int4: if the abscission is expressible then it is both not a consulate and not iconic.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Palatinate is iconic. ; $context$ = sent1: the Palatinate does not upload if that that the Capricorn does upload and it is algal is not right is correct. sent2: the Palatinate is nondeductible. sent3: something is not a kind of a consulate and is not iconic if it is expressible. sent4: the Palatinate... | sent8 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and is not nondeductible is wrong if the Alka-seltzer does not upload hold.; sent7 -> int2: the Alka-seltzer does not upload.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible is not right.; int3 & sent... | DeductionInstance | that something does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible is wrong if it does not upload. | [
"the Alka-seltzer is algal and does not upload.",
"the Palatinate is not iconic if the fact that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible does not hold."
] | [
"If something does not upload, it is wrong.",
"It is wrong if something does not upload."
] | If something does not upload, it is wrong. | the Alka-seltzer is algal and does not upload. |
the Palatinate is iconic. | sent1: the Palatinate does not upload if that that the Capricorn does upload and it is algal is not right is correct. sent2: the Palatinate is nondeductible. sent3: something is not a kind of a consulate and is not iconic if it is expressible. sent4: the Palatinate is not iconic if the Alka-seltzer scavenges. sent5: th... | {B}{a} | sent1: ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent2: {AB}{a} sent3: (x): {E}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{B}x) sent4: {AA}{aa} -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{AB}x) sent7: ({C}{aa} & ¬{A}{aa}) sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent9: ¬{B}{c} -> ¬({A}{b} & {C}{b}) | [
"sent8 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and is not nondeductible is wrong if the Alka-seltzer does not upload hold.; sent7 -> int2: the Alka-seltzer does not upload.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible is not right.; int3 &... | DISPROVED | [
"sent8 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); sent7 -> int2: ¬{A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int3 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the Palatinate does not upload. | ¬{A}{a} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int4: if the abscission is expressible then it is both not a consulate and not iconic.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Palatinate is iconic. ; $context$ = sent1: the Palatinate does not upload if that that the Capricorn does upload and it is algal is not right is correct. sent2: the Palatinate is nondeductible. sent3: something is not a kind of a consulate and is not iconic if it is expressible. sent4: the Palatinate... | sent8 -> int1: the fact that the fact that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and is not nondeductible is wrong if the Alka-seltzer does not upload hold.; sent7 -> int2: the Alka-seltzer does not upload.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible is not right.; int3 & sent... | DeductionInstance | that something does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible is wrong if it does not upload. | [
"the Alka-seltzer is algal and does not upload.",
"the Palatinate is not iconic if the fact that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible does not hold."
] | [
"If something does not upload, it is wrong.",
"It is wrong if something does not upload."
] | It is wrong if something does not upload. | the Palatinate is not iconic if the fact that the Alka-seltzer does not scavenge and it is not nondeductible does not hold. |
the recruiting crossbench and/or the walk happens. | sent1: both the speaking crossbench and the reproduction occurs. sent2: that the recruiting crossbench and/or the walking happens does not hold if the scraping does not occur. sent3: if the aceticness occurs that either the pavage does not occur or the robbing happens or both is incorrect. sent4: that if the hiatus doe... | ({C} v {D}) | sent1: ({AS} & {IR}) sent2: ¬{A} -> ¬({C} v {D}) sent3: {F} -> ¬(¬{E} v {B}) sent4: ¬{T} -> (¬{Q} & {S}) sent5: ¬{P} sent6: ({J} & {I}) -> ¬{H} sent7: ({G} & ¬{F}) sent8: ¬{N} -> (¬{L} & ¬{M}) sent9: ¬(¬{DR} & {C}) -> {DR} sent10: ¬{F} -> ¬(¬{DR} & {C}) sent11: (¬{Q} & ¬{R}) -> ¬{N} sent12: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) sent13: ... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | the cyclicness occurs and the diffusion occurs. | ({DR} & {ER}) | 5 | [
"sent7 -> int1: the aceticness does not occur.; sent10 & int1 -> int2: that the noncyclicness and the recruiting crossbench happens is not right.; sent9 & int2 -> int3: the cyclicness occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the recruiting crossbench and/or the walk happens. ; $context$ = sent1: both the speaking crossbench and the reproduction occurs. sent2: that the recruiting crossbench and/or the walking happens does not hold if the scraping does not occur. sent3: if the aceticness occurs that either the pavage does not ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | both the aceticness and the intolerantness happens if the recruiting rydberg does not occur. | [
"the scraping happens."
] | [
"both the aceticness and the intolerantness happens if the recruiting rydberg does not occur."
] | both the aceticness and the intolerantness happens if the recruiting rydberg does not occur. | the scraping happens. |
the fact that the skyline is not an intifada and does not recruit mercantilism is wrong. | sent1: if the skyline does not recruit usufructuary it is not a kind of a Ecballium. sent2: if something devotes it recruits Stuttgart and/or does not recruit usufructuary. sent3: if the jawan recruits Stuttgart the missal does recruit usufructuary. sent4: the snow-in-summer does not dodge Key and/or it does not stipul... | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) | sent1: ¬{B}{aa} -> ¬{A}{aa} sent2: (x): {E}x -> ({D}x v ¬{B}x) sent3: {D}{c} -> {B}{b} sent4: (¬{S}{h} v ¬{Q}{h}) sent5: ¬{AL}{aa} -> ¬{GH}{aa} sent6: (¬{K}{f} & ¬{L}{f}) -> ¬{J}{d} sent7: (x): {G}x -> ({C}{b} & {F}{b}) sent8: (¬{S}{h} v ¬{Q}{h}) -> ¬{Q}{h} sent9: (x): ¬{N}x -> ({E}x & {H}x) sent10: {O}{g} -> {M}{f} se... | [
"sent1 & sent15 -> int1: the skyline is not a Ecballium.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent1 & sent15 -> int1: ¬{A}{aa};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 21 | 0 | 21 | the skyline is not an intifada and it does not recruit mercantilism. | (¬{AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the skyline is not an intifada and does not recruit mercantilism is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if the skyline does not recruit usufructuary it is not a kind of a Ecballium. sent2: if something devotes it recruits Stuttgart and/or does not recruit usufructuary. sent3: if the jawan recruits ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if the skyline does not recruit usufructuary it is not a kind of a Ecballium. | [
"that the skyline does not recruit usufructuary is not false."
] | [
"if the skyline does not recruit usufructuary it is not a kind of a Ecballium."
] | if the skyline does not recruit usufructuary it is not a kind of a Ecballium. | that the skyline does not recruit usufructuary is not false. |
the periosteum is not a kind of a Pica. | sent1: the silhouette is a Beaverbrook. sent2: if that something does recruit Jew and is a kind of a Kabbalah is wrong it is not plumbaginaceous. sent3: a non-plumbaginaceous thing does swoop hypertrophy and is a Pica. sent4: the silhouette is not frivolous. sent5: if the silhouette does not swoop hypertrophy the fact ... | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: {AA}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬({E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {D}x) sent4: ¬{AB}{aa} sent5: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({B}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent6: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent7: (Ex): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) sent8: (x): ({BR}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{BL}x sent9: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent9 -> int1: the silhouette is not plumbaginaceous if it is a Beaverbrook and is not frivolous.; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: the silhouette is a Beaverbrook but it is not frivolous.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the silhouette is not plumbaginaceous is right.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent9 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | the periosteum is not a kind of a headgear if it does recruit bluefish and it is not a Pica. | ({BR}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{BL}{b} | 1 | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the periosteum is not a kind of a Pica. ; $context$ = sent1: the silhouette is a Beaverbrook. sent2: if that something does recruit Jew and is a kind of a Kabbalah is wrong it is not plumbaginaceous. sent3: a non-plumbaginaceous thing does swoop hypertrophy and is a Pica. sent4: the silhouette is not fri... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | a non-frivolous Beaverbrook is not plumbaginaceous. | [
"the silhouette is a Beaverbrook.",
"the silhouette is not frivolous."
] | [
"A non-frivolous Beaverbrook is not plumbaginaceous.",
"The non-frivolous Beaverbrook is not plumbaginaceous."
] | A non-frivolous Beaverbrook is not plumbaginaceous. | the silhouette is a Beaverbrook. |
the periosteum is not a kind of a Pica. | sent1: the silhouette is a Beaverbrook. sent2: if that something does recruit Jew and is a kind of a Kabbalah is wrong it is not plumbaginaceous. sent3: a non-plumbaginaceous thing does swoop hypertrophy and is a Pica. sent4: the silhouette is not frivolous. sent5: if the silhouette does not swoop hypertrophy the fact ... | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: {AA}{aa} sent2: (x): ¬({E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{B}x sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({A}x & {D}x) sent4: ¬{AB}{aa} sent5: ¬{A}{aa} -> ¬({B}{a} & {AA}{a}) sent6: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{D}{b} sent7: (Ex): ¬({G}x & ¬{H}x) sent8: (x): ({BR}x & ¬{D}x) -> ¬{BL}x sent9: (x): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent9 -> int1: the silhouette is not plumbaginaceous if it is a Beaverbrook and is not frivolous.; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: the silhouette is a Beaverbrook but it is not frivolous.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the silhouette is not plumbaginaceous is right.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent9 -> int1: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}) -> ¬{B}{aa}; sent1 & sent4 -> int2: ({AA}{aa} & ¬{AB}{aa}); int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{aa};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | the periosteum is not a kind of a headgear if it does recruit bluefish and it is not a Pica. | ({BR}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) -> ¬{BL}{b} | 1 | [
"sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the periosteum is not a kind of a Pica. ; $context$ = sent1: the silhouette is a Beaverbrook. sent2: if that something does recruit Jew and is a kind of a Kabbalah is wrong it is not plumbaginaceous. sent3: a non-plumbaginaceous thing does swoop hypertrophy and is a Pica. sent4: the silhouette is not fri... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | a non-frivolous Beaverbrook is not plumbaginaceous. | [
"the silhouette is a Beaverbrook.",
"the silhouette is not frivolous."
] | [
"A non-frivolous Beaverbrook is not plumbaginaceous.",
"The non-frivolous Beaverbrook is not plumbaginaceous."
] | The non-frivolous Beaverbrook is not plumbaginaceous. | the silhouette is not frivolous. |
the flybridge is not a fold. | sent1: the flybridge is non-Senegalese a TLC if it is not a fold. sent2: The technocracy does not dodge haymow. sent3: there is nothing such that it is not a result or it is a trapezohedron or both. sent4: something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is Senegalese. sent5: something is non-jittery if the ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{AB}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: ¬{AC}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{F}x v {E}x) sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{F}x v {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent9: ¬{IN}{a} sent10: (x): (¬{A}x & {AA}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent11: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) ... | [
"sent7 & sent6 -> int1: that the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is a Senegalese is not incorrect.; sent4 -> int2: the haymow is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is a Senegalese.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the haymow is not a TLC.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent4 -> int2: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{a}; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the fact that the change is not a kind of a TLC hold. | ¬{B}{cu} | 6 | [
"sent5 -> int4: if that the haymow does not result and/or is a kind of a trapezohedron does not hold then it is not jittery.; sent3 -> int5: that the haymow is not a result and/or it is a trapezohedron is false.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the haymow is not jittery is not wrong.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the flybridge is not a fold. ; $context$ = sent1: the flybridge is non-Senegalese a TLC if it is not a fold. sent2: The technocracy does not dodge haymow. sent3: there is nothing such that it is not a result or it is a trapezohedron or both. sent4: something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder ... | sent7 & sent6 -> int1: that the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is a Senegalese is not incorrect.; sent4 -> int2: the haymow is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is a Senegalese.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the haymow is not a TLC.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is Senegalese if it does not dodge technocracy. | [
"the haymow does not dodge technocracy.",
"something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is Senegalese.",
"if the haymow is not a TLC then the flybridge does not fold."
] | [
"The haymow does not swoop the gallbladder, but it does dodge technocracy.",
"The haymow does not swoop the gallbladder but it does dodge technocracy.",
"The haymow doesn't swoop the gallbladder but it does dodge technocracy."
] | The haymow does not swoop the gallbladder, but it does dodge technocracy. | the haymow does not dodge technocracy. |
the flybridge is not a fold. | sent1: the flybridge is non-Senegalese a TLC if it is not a fold. sent2: The technocracy does not dodge haymow. sent3: there is nothing such that it is not a result or it is a trapezohedron or both. sent4: something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is Senegalese. sent5: something is non-jittery if the ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{AB}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: ¬{AC}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{F}x v {E}x) sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{F}x v {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent9: ¬{IN}{a} sent10: (x): (¬{A}x & {AA}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent11: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) ... | [
"sent7 & sent6 -> int1: that the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is a Senegalese is not incorrect.; sent4 -> int2: the haymow is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is a Senegalese.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the haymow is not a TLC.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent4 -> int2: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{a}; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the fact that the change is not a kind of a TLC hold. | ¬{B}{cu} | 6 | [
"sent5 -> int4: if that the haymow does not result and/or is a kind of a trapezohedron does not hold then it is not jittery.; sent3 -> int5: that the haymow is not a result and/or it is a trapezohedron is false.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the haymow is not jittery is not wrong.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the flybridge is not a fold. ; $context$ = sent1: the flybridge is non-Senegalese a TLC if it is not a fold. sent2: The technocracy does not dodge haymow. sent3: there is nothing such that it is not a result or it is a trapezohedron or both. sent4: something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder ... | sent7 & sent6 -> int1: that the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is a Senegalese is not incorrect.; sent4 -> int2: the haymow is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is a Senegalese.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the haymow is not a TLC.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is Senegalese if it does not dodge technocracy. | [
"the haymow does not dodge technocracy.",
"something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is Senegalese.",
"if the haymow is not a TLC then the flybridge does not fold."
] | [
"The haymow does not swoop the gallbladder, but it does dodge technocracy.",
"The haymow does not swoop the gallbladder but it does dodge technocracy.",
"The haymow doesn't swoop the gallbladder but it does dodge technocracy."
] | The haymow does not swoop the gallbladder but it does dodge technocracy. | something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is Senegalese. |
the flybridge is not a fold. | sent1: the flybridge is non-Senegalese a TLC if it is not a fold. sent2: The technocracy does not dodge haymow. sent3: there is nothing such that it is not a result or it is a trapezohedron or both. sent4: something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is Senegalese. sent5: something is non-jittery if the ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ¬{C}{b} -> (¬{AB}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: ¬{AC}{aa} sent3: (x): ¬(¬{F}x v {E}x) sent4: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent5: (x): ¬(¬{F}x v {E}x) -> ¬{D}x sent6: ¬{A}{a} sent7: ¬{A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent8: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent9: ¬{IN}{a} sent10: (x): (¬{A}x & {AA}x) -> ¬{AB}x sent11: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) ... | [
"sent7 & sent6 -> int1: that the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is a Senegalese is not incorrect.; sent4 -> int2: the haymow is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is a Senegalese.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the haymow is not a TLC.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent7 & sent6 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}); sent4 -> int2: (¬{AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{B}{a}; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the fact that the change is not a kind of a TLC hold. | ¬{B}{cu} | 6 | [
"sent5 -> int4: if that the haymow does not result and/or is a kind of a trapezohedron does not hold then it is not jittery.; sent3 -> int5: that the haymow is not a result and/or it is a trapezohedron is false.; int4 & int5 -> int6: that the haymow is not jittery is not wrong.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the flybridge is not a fold. ; $context$ = sent1: the flybridge is non-Senegalese a TLC if it is not a fold. sent2: The technocracy does not dodge haymow. sent3: there is nothing such that it is not a result or it is a trapezohedron or both. sent4: something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder ... | sent7 & sent6 -> int1: that the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is a Senegalese is not incorrect.; sent4 -> int2: the haymow is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is a Senegalese.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the haymow is not a TLC.; int3 & sent8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the haymow does not swoop gallbladder but it is Senegalese if it does not dodge technocracy. | [
"the haymow does not dodge technocracy.",
"something is not a TLC if it does not swoop gallbladder and is Senegalese.",
"if the haymow is not a TLC then the flybridge does not fold."
] | [
"The haymow does not swoop the gallbladder, but it does dodge technocracy.",
"The haymow does not swoop the gallbladder but it does dodge technocracy.",
"The haymow doesn't swoop the gallbladder but it does dodge technocracy."
] | The haymow doesn't swoop the gallbladder but it does dodge technocracy. | if the haymow is not a TLC then the flybridge does not fold. |
the cereal is a bouillabaisse but it is not Monacan. | sent1: the cereal does not rap and it is not a kind of a choke if it does dodge motorcade. sent2: if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse. sent3: if the fact that something is not a rap is right then it is either a bouillabaisse or not Monacan or both. sent4: there is something such that it is not a Ele... | ({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) | sent1: {F}{a} -> (¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent2: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x v ¬{A}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent5: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent6: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent8: (x): ({B}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{A}{bp} | [
"sent7 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Jerome and/or it is a kind of a Eleotridae is wrong.; sent2 -> int2: the cereal is a kind of a bouillabaisse if it recruits pectin.; sent6 & sent5 -> int3: the cereal recruits pectin.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the cereal is a bouillaba... | UNKNOWN | [
"sent7 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x); sent2 -> int2: {C}{a} -> {B}{a}; sent6 & sent5 -> int3: {C}{a}; int2 & int3 -> int4: {B}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | the consomme does recruit pectin. | {C}{bp} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int5: if the cereal is not a kind of a rap then it is a bouillabaisse and/or it is not Monacan.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the cereal is a bouillabaisse but it is not Monacan. ; $context$ = sent1: the cereal does not rap and it is not a kind of a choke if it does dodge motorcade. sent2: if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse. sent3: if the fact that something is not a rap is right then it is either a bouilla... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that either the boar is not a Jerome or it is a Eleotridae or both is not right. | [
"if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse.",
"if the fact that the cereal does rap but it does not recruit pectin does not hold then it does recruit pectin.",
"that the cereal is a rap and does not recruit pectin does not hold."
] | [
"The fact that it is a Eleotridae or not is not right.",
"The fact that the boar is not a Jerome or Eleotridae is not right.",
"The fact that the boar isn't a Jerome or Eleotridae isn't right."
] | The fact that it is a Eleotridae or not is not right. | if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse. |
the cereal is a bouillabaisse but it is not Monacan. | sent1: the cereal does not rap and it is not a kind of a choke if it does dodge motorcade. sent2: if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse. sent3: if the fact that something is not a rap is right then it is either a bouillabaisse or not Monacan or both. sent4: there is something such that it is not a Ele... | ({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) | sent1: {F}{a} -> (¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent2: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x v ¬{A}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent5: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent6: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent8: (x): ({B}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{A}{bp} | [
"sent7 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Jerome and/or it is a kind of a Eleotridae is wrong.; sent2 -> int2: the cereal is a kind of a bouillabaisse if it recruits pectin.; sent6 & sent5 -> int3: the cereal recruits pectin.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the cereal is a bouillaba... | UNKNOWN | [
"sent7 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x); sent2 -> int2: {C}{a} -> {B}{a}; sent6 & sent5 -> int3: {C}{a}; int2 & int3 -> int4: {B}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | the consomme does recruit pectin. | {C}{bp} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int5: if the cereal is not a kind of a rap then it is a bouillabaisse and/or it is not Monacan.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the cereal is a bouillabaisse but it is not Monacan. ; $context$ = sent1: the cereal does not rap and it is not a kind of a choke if it does dodge motorcade. sent2: if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse. sent3: if the fact that something is not a rap is right then it is either a bouilla... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that either the boar is not a Jerome or it is a Eleotridae or both is not right. | [
"if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse.",
"if the fact that the cereal does rap but it does not recruit pectin does not hold then it does recruit pectin.",
"that the cereal is a rap and does not recruit pectin does not hold."
] | [
"The fact that it is a Eleotridae or not is not right.",
"The fact that the boar is not a Jerome or Eleotridae is not right.",
"The fact that the boar isn't a Jerome or Eleotridae isn't right."
] | The fact that the boar is not a Jerome or Eleotridae is not right. | if the fact that the cereal does rap but it does not recruit pectin does not hold then it does recruit pectin. |
the cereal is a bouillabaisse but it is not Monacan. | sent1: the cereal does not rap and it is not a kind of a choke if it does dodge motorcade. sent2: if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse. sent3: if the fact that something is not a rap is right then it is either a bouillabaisse or not Monacan or both. sent4: there is something such that it is not a Ele... | ({B}{a} & ¬{A}{a}) | sent1: {F}{a} -> (¬{D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent2: (x): {C}x -> {B}x sent3: (x): ¬{D}x -> ({B}x v ¬{A}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent5: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent6: ¬({D}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) -> {C}{a} sent7: ¬(¬{AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) sent8: (x): ({B}x v ¬{A}x) -> ¬{A}{bp} | [
"sent7 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a Jerome and/or it is a kind of a Eleotridae is wrong.; sent2 -> int2: the cereal is a kind of a bouillabaisse if it recruits pectin.; sent6 & sent5 -> int3: the cereal recruits pectin.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the cereal is a bouillaba... | UNKNOWN | [
"sent7 -> int1: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x v {AB}x); sent2 -> int2: {C}{a} -> {B}{a}; sent6 & sent5 -> int3: {C}{a}; int2 & int3 -> int4: {B}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 4 | 0 | 4 | the consomme does recruit pectin. | {C}{bp} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int5: if the cereal is not a kind of a rap then it is a bouillabaisse and/or it is not Monacan.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the cereal is a bouillabaisse but it is not Monacan. ; $context$ = sent1: the cereal does not rap and it is not a kind of a choke if it does dodge motorcade. sent2: if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse. sent3: if the fact that something is not a rap is right then it is either a bouilla... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that either the boar is not a Jerome or it is a Eleotridae or both is not right. | [
"if something recruits pectin then it is a bouillabaisse.",
"if the fact that the cereal does rap but it does not recruit pectin does not hold then it does recruit pectin.",
"that the cereal is a rap and does not recruit pectin does not hold."
] | [
"The fact that it is a Eleotridae or not is not right.",
"The fact that the boar is not a Jerome or Eleotridae is not right.",
"The fact that the boar isn't a Jerome or Eleotridae isn't right."
] | The fact that the boar isn't a Jerome or Eleotridae isn't right. | that the cereal is a rap and does not recruit pectin does not hold. |
that the basophil is not cecal hold. | sent1: that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. sent2: if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. sent3: if the inkberry is a keratotomy and it is cecal then that it is not a kind of a rennet is right. sent4: the basophil is a kind of a modernization if the inkberry ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ¬({A}{b} & {E}{b}) sent2: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent3: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: ¬({A}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{A}{b} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the basophil is a modernization.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the basophil is not a rennet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the basophil is a modernization but not a rennet.; sent2 -> int4: if the basophil is a modernization and not a rennet it is not cecal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}); sent2 -> int4: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | the humanities is not Aberdonian and it is not a kind of a modernization. | (¬{EO}{ig} & ¬{B}{ig}) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the basophil is not cecal hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. sent2: if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. sent3: if the inkberry is a keratotomy and it is cecal then that it is not a kind of a rennet is right.... | sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the basophil is a modernization.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the basophil is not a rennet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the basophil is a modernization but not a rennet.; sent2 -> int4: if the basophil is a modernization and not a rennet it is not cecal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the basophil is a kind of a modernization if the inkberry is both not a daub and not subsurface. | [
"the inkberry is not a daub and it is not subsurface.",
"the basophil is not a rennet if that it is a rennet and a takeover is wrong.",
"that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong.",
"if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal."
] | [
"The basophil is a kind of modernization if the inkberry is not a daub.",
"If the inkberry is not a daub and not a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization.",
"If the inkberry is neither a daub nor a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization.",
"If the inkberry is not a daub, the basophil... | The basophil is a kind of modernization if the inkberry is not a daub. | the inkberry is not a daub and it is not subsurface. |
that the basophil is not cecal hold. | sent1: that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. sent2: if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. sent3: if the inkberry is a keratotomy and it is cecal then that it is not a kind of a rennet is right. sent4: the basophil is a kind of a modernization if the inkberry ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ¬({A}{b} & {E}{b}) sent2: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent3: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: ¬({A}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{A}{b} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the basophil is a modernization.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the basophil is not a rennet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the basophil is a modernization but not a rennet.; sent2 -> int4: if the basophil is a modernization and not a rennet it is not cecal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}); sent2 -> int4: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | the humanities is not Aberdonian and it is not a kind of a modernization. | (¬{EO}{ig} & ¬{B}{ig}) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the basophil is not cecal hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. sent2: if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. sent3: if the inkberry is a keratotomy and it is cecal then that it is not a kind of a rennet is right.... | sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the basophil is a modernization.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the basophil is not a rennet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the basophil is a modernization but not a rennet.; sent2 -> int4: if the basophil is a modernization and not a rennet it is not cecal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the basophil is a kind of a modernization if the inkberry is both not a daub and not subsurface. | [
"the inkberry is not a daub and it is not subsurface.",
"the basophil is not a rennet if that it is a rennet and a takeover is wrong.",
"that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong.",
"if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal."
] | [
"The basophil is a kind of modernization if the inkberry is not a daub.",
"If the inkberry is not a daub and not a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization.",
"If the inkberry is neither a daub nor a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization.",
"If the inkberry is not a daub, the basophil... | If the inkberry is not a daub and not a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization. | the basophil is not a rennet if that it is a rennet and a takeover is wrong. |
that the basophil is not cecal hold. | sent1: that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. sent2: if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. sent3: if the inkberry is a keratotomy and it is cecal then that it is not a kind of a rennet is right. sent4: the basophil is a kind of a modernization if the inkberry ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ¬({A}{b} & {E}{b}) sent2: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent3: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: ¬({A}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{A}{b} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the basophil is a modernization.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the basophil is not a rennet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the basophil is a modernization but not a rennet.; sent2 -> int4: if the basophil is a modernization and not a rennet it is not cecal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}); sent2 -> int4: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | the humanities is not Aberdonian and it is not a kind of a modernization. | (¬{EO}{ig} & ¬{B}{ig}) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the basophil is not cecal hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. sent2: if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. sent3: if the inkberry is a keratotomy and it is cecal then that it is not a kind of a rennet is right.... | sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the basophil is a modernization.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the basophil is not a rennet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the basophil is a modernization but not a rennet.; sent2 -> int4: if the basophil is a modernization and not a rennet it is not cecal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the basophil is a kind of a modernization if the inkberry is both not a daub and not subsurface. | [
"the inkberry is not a daub and it is not subsurface.",
"the basophil is not a rennet if that it is a rennet and a takeover is wrong.",
"that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong.",
"if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal."
] | [
"The basophil is a kind of modernization if the inkberry is not a daub.",
"If the inkberry is not a daub and not a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization.",
"If the inkberry is neither a daub nor a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization.",
"If the inkberry is not a daub, the basophil... | If the inkberry is neither a daub nor a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization. | that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. |
that the basophil is not cecal hold. | sent1: that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. sent2: if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. sent3: if the inkberry is a keratotomy and it is cecal then that it is not a kind of a rennet is right. sent4: the basophil is a kind of a modernization if the inkberry ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ¬({A}{b} & {E}{b}) sent2: (x): ({B}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{C}x sent3: ({D}{a} & {C}{a}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent4: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent5: (¬{AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent6: ¬({A}{b} & {E}{b}) -> ¬{A}{b} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the basophil is a modernization.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the basophil is not a rennet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the basophil is a modernization but not a rennet.; sent2 -> int4: if the basophil is a modernization and not a rennet it is not cecal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: {B}{b}; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: ¬{A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}); sent2 -> int4: ({B}{b} & ¬{A}{b}) -> ¬{C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 1 | the humanities is not Aberdonian and it is not a kind of a modernization. | (¬{EO}{ig} & ¬{B}{ig}) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the basophil is not cecal hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong. sent2: if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. sent3: if the inkberry is a keratotomy and it is cecal then that it is not a kind of a rennet is right.... | sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the basophil is a modernization.; sent6 & sent1 -> int2: the basophil is not a rennet.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the basophil is a modernization but not a rennet.; sent2 -> int4: if the basophil is a modernization and not a rennet it is not cecal.; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the basophil is a kind of a modernization if the inkberry is both not a daub and not subsurface. | [
"the inkberry is not a daub and it is not subsurface.",
"the basophil is not a rennet if that it is a rennet and a takeover is wrong.",
"that the basophil is both a rennet and a takeover is wrong.",
"if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal."
] | [
"The basophil is a kind of modernization if the inkberry is not a daub.",
"If the inkberry is not a daub and not a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization.",
"If the inkberry is neither a daub nor a subsurface, the basophil is a kind of modernization.",
"If the inkberry is not a daub, the basophil... | If the inkberry is not a daub, the basophil is a kind of modernization. | if something is a modernization but it is not a rennet then it is not cecal. |
the suggestion does not occur. | sent1: that that the inconsiderableness does not occur and the heaves does not occur is incorrect if the speaking Maracaibo occurs hold. sent2: the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold. sent3: the apologeticsness occurs. sent4: if the swooping erythrod... | ¬{C} | sent1: {G} -> ¬(¬{F} & ¬{E}) sent2: ¬{B} -> ({EL} & {A}) sent3: {FH} sent4: ¬{B} -> ({A} & {C}) sent5: {AN} sent6: ¬(¬{R} & {S}) -> {O} sent7: ({O} & ¬{N}) -> ¬{M} sent8: ¬(¬{R} & {S}) sent9: ¬{H} -> ({F} & {G}) sent10: {B} sent11: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent12: {K} -> ¬({J} & ¬{I}) sent13: ({AH} & {IJ}) sent14: ¬{M} -> (... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 17 | 0 | 17 | the suggestion happens. | {C} | 14 | [
"sent6 & sent8 -> int1: the meniscectomy occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the suggestion does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: that that the inconsiderableness does not occur and the heaves does not occur is incorrect if the speaking Maracaibo occurs hold. sent2: the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold. sent3:... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold. | [
"that the dodging Lawrence does not occur leads to that both the recruiting Ur and the speaking Maracaibo occurs."
] | [
"the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold."
] | the shape-up happens and the untranslatableness occurs if that the swooping erythroderma does not occur hold. | that the dodging Lawrence does not occur leads to that both the recruiting Ur and the speaking Maracaibo occurs. |
the ministerialness does not occur. | sent1: the recruiting reproducibility occurs. sent2: if the fact that the coo but not the hooking happens is not correct then the recruiting winning occurs. sent3: the ministerialness is prevented by that the solarizing occurs and the recruiting winning occurs. sent4: both the solarizing and the feat occurs if the purr... | ¬{D} | sent1: {A} sent2: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) -> {B} sent3: ({C} & {B}) -> ¬{D} sent4: ¬{F} -> ({C} & {E}) sent5: ¬{F} | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: the solarizing and the feat happens.; int1 -> int2: the fact that the solarizing happens is not false.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent4 & sent5 -> int1: ({C} & {E}); int1 -> int2: {C};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the ministerialness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the recruiting reproducibility occurs. sent2: if the fact that the coo but not the hooking happens is not correct then the recruiting winning occurs. sent3: the ministerialness is prevented by that the solarizing occurs and the recruiting winning o... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | both the solarizing and the feat occurs if the purring does not occur. | [
"the purring does not occur."
] | [
"both the solarizing and the feat occurs if the purring does not occur."
] | both the solarizing and the feat occurs if the purring does not occur. | the purring does not occur. |
there exists something such that if it is not zymotic then the fact that it is not a kind of a freak is not false. | sent1: there exists something such that if it is not zymotic the fact that it does freak hold. sent2: if something is not philological it is not a kind of a bugged. sent3: there is something such that if it is not viceregal that it does mutiny is correct. sent4: if something is not pyogenic that it is not a kind of a A... | (Ex): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x | sent1: (Ex): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent2: (x): ¬{M}x -> ¬{FK}x sent3: (Ex): ¬{EE}x -> {GF}x sent4: (x): ¬{CD}x -> ¬{CJ}x sent5: {B}{aa} -> ¬{C}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> {C}x sent7: (Ex): {B}x -> ¬{C}x | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 7 | 0 | 7 | there exists something such that if it is not philological then it is not a bugged. | (Ex): ¬{M}x -> ¬{FK}x | 2 | [
"sent2 -> int1: if the exchanger is not philological then it is not a bugged.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not zymotic then the fact that it is not a kind of a freak is not false. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not zymotic the fact that it does freak hold. sent2: if something is not philological it is not a kind of a bugged. sent3: ther... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | if the soapwort is zymotic that it is not a freak is not wrong. | [
"if something is not pyogenic that it is not a kind of a Albanian is not false."
] | [
"if the soapwort is zymotic that it is not a freak is not wrong."
] | if the soapwort is zymotic that it is not a freak is not wrong. | if something is not pyogenic that it is not a kind of a Albanian is not false. |
the dextrose is not terpsichorean. | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it does not recruit beat and it is a Glaswegian is not true. sent2: there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. sent3: if that something is Brobdingnagian thing that is a kind of a Taiwanese does not hold it is not a kind of a Taiwanese. sent4: ... | ¬{B}{a} | sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent5: ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) -> {F}{c} sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent2 -> int1: that that the beat is a kind of a bullshit that is a scrapbook does not hold is correct.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the dextrose is not a binary.; sent8 -> int3: the dextrose is not terpsichorean if it is not a binary.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & sent7 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; sent8 -> int3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | the fact that the dextrose is terpsichorean is not incorrect. | {B}{a} | 7 | [
"sent4 -> int4: if the aggravator is not a kind of a Taiwanese then it is not a ramie and is not a binary.; sent3 -> int5: if that the aggravator is Brobdingnagian and it is Taiwanese does not hold it is not a Taiwanese.; sent1 & sent6 -> int6: that the clearing does recruit beat hold.; int6 -> int7: there is somet... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the dextrose is not terpsichorean. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it does not recruit beat and it is a Glaswegian is not true. sent2: there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. sent3: if that something is Brobdingnagian thing that is a kind of a ... | sent2 -> int1: that that the beat is a kind of a bullshit that is a scrapbook does not hold is correct.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the dextrose is not a binary.; sent8 -> int3: the dextrose is not terpsichorean if it is not a binary.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. | [
"if that the beat bullshits and is a scrapbook is not true then the dextrose is not a binary.",
"something that is not a binary is not terpsichorean."
] | [
"There is no such thing as a bullshit and a scrapbook.",
"There is no such thing as a bullshit."
] | There is no such thing as a bullshit and a scrapbook. | if that the beat bullshits and is a scrapbook is not true then the dextrose is not a binary. |
the dextrose is not terpsichorean. | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it does not recruit beat and it is a Glaswegian is not true. sent2: there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. sent3: if that something is Brobdingnagian thing that is a kind of a Taiwanese does not hold it is not a kind of a Taiwanese. sent4: ... | ¬{B}{a} | sent1: (Ex): ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x & {AB}x) sent3: (x): ¬({E}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent4: (x): ¬{D}x -> (¬{C}x & ¬{A}x) sent5: ¬{B}{aa} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{F}x & {G}x) -> {F}{c} sent7: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{A}x -> ¬{B}x | [
"sent2 -> int1: that that the beat is a kind of a bullshit that is a scrapbook does not hold is correct.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the dextrose is not a binary.; sent8 -> int3: the dextrose is not terpsichorean if it is not a binary.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); int1 & sent7 -> int2: ¬{A}{a}; sent8 -> int3: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 5 | the fact that the dextrose is terpsichorean is not incorrect. | {B}{a} | 7 | [
"sent4 -> int4: if the aggravator is not a kind of a Taiwanese then it is not a ramie and is not a binary.; sent3 -> int5: if that the aggravator is Brobdingnagian and it is Taiwanese does not hold it is not a Taiwanese.; sent1 & sent6 -> int6: that the clearing does recruit beat hold.; int6 -> int7: there is somet... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the dextrose is not terpsichorean. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it does not recruit beat and it is a Glaswegian is not true. sent2: there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. sent3: if that something is Brobdingnagian thing that is a kind of a ... | sent2 -> int1: that that the beat is a kind of a bullshit that is a scrapbook does not hold is correct.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the dextrose is not a binary.; sent8 -> int3: the dextrose is not terpsichorean if it is not a binary.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there exists nothing such that it is a bullshit and a scrapbook. | [
"if that the beat bullshits and is a scrapbook is not true then the dextrose is not a binary.",
"something that is not a binary is not terpsichorean."
] | [
"There is no such thing as a bullshit and a scrapbook.",
"There is no such thing as a bullshit."
] | There is no such thing as a bullshit. | something that is not a binary is not terpsichorean. |
the iodination is not faecal. | sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong. sent2: that the vulture is not a inexplicitness and not a Saone is incorrect if it is exodontic. sent3: if that there exists something such that it is not a seigniorage is not false the graft is not a code. sent4: there is ... | ¬{D}{b} | sent1: (Ex): ¬({D}x & {C}x) sent2: {F}{c} -> ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{G}{c}) sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{S}{a} sent4: (Ex): ¬({B}x & {D}x) sent5: (x): {B}x -> ¬({C}{a} & {D}{a}) sent6: {E}{c} -> {B}{a} sent7: (x): (¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) -> {C}{a} sent8: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: (x): {B}x -> ¬({D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent10: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{G}{c})... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 16 | 0 | 16 | the fact that the iodination is faecal hold. | {D}{b} | 10 | [
"sent18 -> int1: if the iodination does dodge candlenut it is faecal.; sent15 & sent7 -> int2: the fact that the graft disbands is not wrong.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the iodination is not faecal. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong. sent2: that the vulture is not a inexplicitness and not a Saone is incorrect if it is exodontic. sent3: if that there exists something such that it is not a seignio... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong. | [
"the fact that the iodination is a inexplicitness and it does disband does not hold."
] | [
"there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong."
] | there exists something such that the fact that it is faecal and it does disband is wrong. | the fact that the iodination is a inexplicitness and it does disband does not hold. |
that there exists something such that it is not an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus does not hold. | sent1: the warehouse is not a kind of an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus if something is a sourwood. sent2: there is something such that it does not incline. sent3: that something is a sourwood that does not dodge ranch does not hold if it is not an elite. sent4: something does not swoop midbrain and it ... | ¬((Ex): (¬{B}x & ¬{C}x)) | sent1: (x): {A}x -> (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}) sent2: (Ex): ¬{BA}x sent3: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({A}x & ¬{HP}x) sent4: (Ex): (¬{IT}x & ¬{JJ}x) sent5: (x): ¬({A}x & ¬{HP}x) -> {HP}x sent6: (x): {A}x -> ¬{C}{a} sent7: (Ex): ({AQ}x & ¬{CO}x) sent8: (x): {B}x -> (¬{IL}{a} & ¬{IN}{a}) sent9: (Ex): {A}x sent10: (Ex): ({B}x & ¬{C}x) sent11... | [
"sent9 & sent1 -> int1: the warehouse is not an elite and not a Fuscoboletinus.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 & sent1 -> int1: (¬{B}{a} & ¬{C}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 9 | 0 | 9 | there exists something such that it dodges ranch. | (Ex): {HP}x | 5 | [
"sent5 -> int2: if the fact that the warehouse is a kind of a sourwood that does not dodge ranch is false then it dodge ranch.; sent3 -> int3: if the warehouse is not an elite that it is a sourwood and does not dodge ranch is wrong.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that there exists something such that it is not an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the warehouse is not a kind of an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus if something is a sourwood. sent2: there is something such that it does not incline. sent3... | sent9 & sent1 -> int1: the warehouse is not an elite and not a Fuscoboletinus.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is a kind of a sourwood. | [
"the warehouse is not a kind of an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus if something is a sourwood."
] | [
"there is something such that it is a kind of a sourwood."
] | there is something such that it is a kind of a sourwood. | the warehouse is not a kind of an elite and it is not a kind of a Fuscoboletinus if something is a sourwood. |
the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur. | sent1: the fact that both the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness happens is false if the jurisprudentialness does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the Bosnianness and the recruiting huisache occurs does not hold then the recruiting huisache does not occur. sent3: the inflection does not occur. sent4: if the jurispr... | (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬({B} & {HC}) -> ¬{HC} sent3: ¬{AF} sent4: {A} -> {B} sent5: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬(¬{DQ} & ¬{HN}) sent7: {A} sent8: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent9: {HJ} sent10: {DP} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur is incorrect.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the Bosnianness does not occur.; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: the Bosnianness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent5 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: {B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the recruiting huisache does not occur. | ¬{HC} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that both the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness happens is false if the jurisprudentialness does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the Bosnianness and the recruiting huisache occurs does not hold then the recruiting... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur is incorrect.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the Bosnianness does not occur.; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: the Bosnianness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the Bosnianness does not occur if that that the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness occurs hold does not hold. | [
"if the jurisprudentialness happens the Bosnianness occurs.",
"the jurisprudentialness happens."
] | [
"The Bosnianness doesn't happen if the non-Texanness and non-fossilness doesn't hold.",
"The Bosnianness doesn't occur if the non-Texanness and non-fossilness doesn't hold."
] | The Bosnianness doesn't happen if the non-Texanness and non-fossilness doesn't hold. | if the jurisprudentialness happens the Bosnianness occurs. |
the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur. | sent1: the fact that both the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness happens is false if the jurisprudentialness does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the Bosnianness and the recruiting huisache occurs does not hold then the recruiting huisache does not occur. sent3: the inflection does not occur. sent4: if the jurispr... | (¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) | sent1: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) sent2: ¬({B} & {HC}) -> ¬{HC} sent3: ¬{AF} sent4: {A} -> {B} sent5: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}) -> ¬{B} sent6: ¬(¬{DQ} & ¬{HN}) sent7: {A} sent8: ¬(¬{AA} & {AB}) sent9: {HJ} sent10: {DP} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur is incorrect.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the Bosnianness does not occur.; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: the Bosnianness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: ¬(¬{AA} & ¬{AB}); sent5 & assump1 -> int1: ¬{B}; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: {B}; int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the recruiting huisache does not occur. | ¬{HC} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that both the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness happens is false if the jurisprudentialness does not occur. sent2: if the fact that the Bosnianness and the recruiting huisache occurs does not hold then the recruiting... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the Texan does not occur and the fossil does not occur is incorrect.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the Bosnianness does not occur.; sent4 & sent7 -> int2: the Bosnianness happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the Bosnianness does not occur if that that the non-Texanness and the non-fossilness occurs hold does not hold. | [
"if the jurisprudentialness happens the Bosnianness occurs.",
"the jurisprudentialness happens."
] | [
"The Bosnianness doesn't happen if the non-Texanness and non-fossilness doesn't hold.",
"The Bosnianness doesn't occur if the non-Texanness and non-fossilness doesn't hold."
] | The Bosnianness doesn't occur if the non-Texanness and non-fossilness doesn't hold. | the jurisprudentialness happens. |
the fact that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is not correct. | sent1: if the fact that the precinct is not estrous is not wrong then that the expanse either is not a manatee or is estrous or both does not hold. sent2: that the precinct is not a Phanerozoic or it is a manatee or both is not true if the expanse is not a kind of a manatee. sent3: that something is not a microflora bu... | ¬(¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | sent1: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} v {D}{b}) sent2: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} v {A}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{P}{b} sent6: {D}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬{C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent10: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the precinct is not a kind of a microflora.; sent9 -> int2: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic if it is not a microflora.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent9 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a}; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | that the expanse is not estrous and/or it is a Phanerozoic hold. | (¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | 5 | [
"sent3 -> int4: if the precinct is not butyric then the fact that it is not a microflora but a manatee is incorrect.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the precinct is not estrous is not wrong then that the expanse either is not a manatee or is estrous or both does not hold. sent2: that the precinct is not a Phanerozoic or it is a m... | sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the precinct is not a kind of a microflora.; sent9 -> int2: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic if it is not a microflora.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the precinct is not a kind of a microflora if it is not a manatee. | [
"the precinct is not a manatee.",
"if something is not a microflora then it is not a Phanerozoic.",
"if the precinct is not a Phanerozoic the fact that that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is incorrect is correct."
] | [
"The precinct isn't a microflora if it isn't a manatee.",
"The precinct is not a microflora if it is not a manatee.",
"If it is not a manatee, the precinct is not a microflora."
] | The precinct isn't a microflora if it isn't a manatee. | the precinct is not a manatee. |
the fact that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is not correct. | sent1: if the fact that the precinct is not estrous is not wrong then that the expanse either is not a manatee or is estrous or both does not hold. sent2: that the precinct is not a Phanerozoic or it is a manatee or both is not true if the expanse is not a kind of a manatee. sent3: that something is not a microflora bu... | ¬(¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | sent1: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} v {D}{b}) sent2: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} v {A}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{P}{b} sent6: {D}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬{C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent10: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the precinct is not a kind of a microflora.; sent9 -> int2: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic if it is not a microflora.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent9 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a}; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | that the expanse is not estrous and/or it is a Phanerozoic hold. | (¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | 5 | [
"sent3 -> int4: if the precinct is not butyric then the fact that it is not a microflora but a manatee is incorrect.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the precinct is not estrous is not wrong then that the expanse either is not a manatee or is estrous or both does not hold. sent2: that the precinct is not a Phanerozoic or it is a m... | sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the precinct is not a kind of a microflora.; sent9 -> int2: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic if it is not a microflora.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the precinct is not a kind of a microflora if it is not a manatee. | [
"the precinct is not a manatee.",
"if something is not a microflora then it is not a Phanerozoic.",
"if the precinct is not a Phanerozoic the fact that that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is incorrect is correct."
] | [
"The precinct isn't a microflora if it isn't a manatee.",
"The precinct is not a microflora if it is not a manatee.",
"If it is not a manatee, the precinct is not a microflora."
] | The precinct is not a microflora if it is not a manatee. | if something is not a microflora then it is not a Phanerozoic. |
the fact that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is not correct. | sent1: if the fact that the precinct is not estrous is not wrong then that the expanse either is not a manatee or is estrous or both does not hold. sent2: that the precinct is not a Phanerozoic or it is a manatee or both is not true if the expanse is not a kind of a manatee. sent3: that something is not a microflora bu... | ¬(¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | sent1: ¬{D}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{b} v {D}{b}) sent2: ¬{A}{b} -> ¬(¬{C}{a} v {A}{a}) sent3: (x): ¬{E}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) sent4: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent5: ¬{B}{b} -> ¬{P}{b} sent6: {D}{b} sent7: ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬{C}{a} -> {D}{b} sent9: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬{C}x sent10: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the precinct is not a kind of a microflora.; sent9 -> int2: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic if it is not a microflora.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent4 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent9 -> int2: ¬{B}{a} -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a}; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | that the expanse is not estrous and/or it is a Phanerozoic hold. | (¬{D}{b} v {C}{b}) | 5 | [
"sent3 -> int4: if the precinct is not butyric then the fact that it is not a microflora but a manatee is incorrect.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the precinct is not estrous is not wrong then that the expanse either is not a manatee or is estrous or both does not hold. sent2: that the precinct is not a Phanerozoic or it is a m... | sent4 & sent7 -> int1: the precinct is not a kind of a microflora.; sent9 -> int2: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic if it is not a microflora.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the precinct is not a Phanerozoic.; int3 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the precinct is not a kind of a microflora if it is not a manatee. | [
"the precinct is not a manatee.",
"if something is not a microflora then it is not a Phanerozoic.",
"if the precinct is not a Phanerozoic the fact that that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is incorrect is correct."
] | [
"The precinct isn't a microflora if it isn't a manatee.",
"The precinct is not a microflora if it is not a manatee.",
"If it is not a manatee, the precinct is not a microflora."
] | If it is not a manatee, the precinct is not a microflora. | if the precinct is not a Phanerozoic the fact that that the expanse is not estrous or is a Phanerozoic or both is incorrect is correct. |
the tropic is over-the-counter and/or it is not nonrepetitive. | sent1: that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold. sent2: either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue. sent3: the celibate is not a dialogue if the fact that the molding is Noachian and/or not a Bhutanese is not true. | ({A}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) | sent1: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> ({A}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent3: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the celibate is not a dialogue.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the tropic is over-the-counter and/or it is not nonrepetitive. ; $context$ = sent1: that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold. sent2: either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue. sent3: the celibate is not a di... | sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the celibate is not a dialogue.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the celibate is not a dialogue if the fact that the molding is Noachian and/or not a Bhutanese is not true. | [
"that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold.",
"either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue."
] | [
"The celibate is not a dialogue if the mold is Noachian or not a Bhutanese.",
"The celibate is not a dialogue if the molding is Noachian or not a Bhutanese."
] | The celibate is not a dialogue if the mold is Noachian or not a Bhutanese. | that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold. |
the tropic is over-the-counter and/or it is not nonrepetitive. | sent1: that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold. sent2: either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue. sent3: the celibate is not a dialogue if the fact that the molding is Noachian and/or not a Bhutanese is not true. | ({A}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) | sent1: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent2: ¬{B}{b} -> ({A}{c} v ¬{C}{c}) sent3: ¬({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the celibate is not a dialogue.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent3 & sent1 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the tropic is over-the-counter and/or it is not nonrepetitive. ; $context$ = sent1: that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold. sent2: either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue. sent3: the celibate is not a di... | sent3 & sent1 -> int1: the celibate is not a dialogue.; sent2 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the celibate is not a dialogue if the fact that the molding is Noachian and/or not a Bhutanese is not true. | [
"that the molding is Noachian and/or not Bhutanese does not hold.",
"either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue."
] | [
"The celibate is not a dialogue if the mold is Noachian or not a Bhutanese.",
"The celibate is not a dialogue if the molding is Noachian or not a Bhutanese."
] | The celibate is not a dialogue if the molding is Noachian or not a Bhutanese. | either the tropic is over-the-counter or it is not nonrepetitive or both if the celibate is not a kind of a dialogue. |
the fact that the stearin dodges transplant and it is a pastorale is not right. | sent1: if something does not dodge haymow that it does dodge osteopathy and it elegizes is not correct. sent2: the speed does dodge polyptoton and grits. sent3: the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. sent4: if that the haymow is a sky but it is not unsinkable is not wrong the ganoin is not unsinkable. sent5: the ga... | ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({I}x & {J}x) sent2: ({HS}{je} & {JG}{je}) sent3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent4: ({E}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent5: {C}{a} sent6: ({E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent7: {E}{a} sent8: (x): ({F}x v ¬{G}x) -> {E}{c} sent9: ¬({I}{c} & {J}{c}) -> ¬{H}{c} sent10: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent11: ({F}{d} v ¬{G}{d}) s... | [
"sent3 -> int1: the ganoin brings.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the stearin is a pastorale.; sent6 -> int3: the stearin dodges transplant.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent15 -> int2: {C}{b}; sent6 -> int3: {D}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the fact that the stearin does dodge transplant and it is a pastorale does not hold. | ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) | 9 | [
"sent11 -> int4: there exists something such that either it is a December or it is not a kind of a salvo or both.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the haymow is a sky.; sent10 -> int6: the haymow is not unsinkable and does not bring if it is not a crocolite.; sent1 -> int7: the fact that the haymow dodges osteopathy and eleg... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the stearin dodges transplant and it is a pastorale is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not dodge haymow that it does dodge osteopathy and it elegizes is not correct. sent2: the speed does dodge polyptoton and grits. sent3: the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. sent4: ... | sent3 -> int1: the ganoin brings.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the stearin is a pastorale.; sent6 -> int3: the stearin dodges transplant.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. | [
"if the ganoin brings the stearin is a pastorale.",
"the fact that the stearin is a sky and it dodges transplant is true."
] | [
"The ganoin does bring and is not sinkable.",
"The ganoin is not sinkable."
] | The ganoin does bring and is not sinkable. | if the ganoin brings the stearin is a pastorale. |
the fact that the stearin dodges transplant and it is a pastorale is not right. | sent1: if something does not dodge haymow that it does dodge osteopathy and it elegizes is not correct. sent2: the speed does dodge polyptoton and grits. sent3: the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. sent4: if that the haymow is a sky but it is not unsinkable is not wrong the ganoin is not unsinkable. sent5: the ga... | ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (x): ¬{K}x -> ¬({I}x & {J}x) sent2: ({HS}{je} & {JG}{je}) sent3: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent4: ({E}{c} & ¬{A}{c}) -> ¬{A}{a} sent5: {C}{a} sent6: ({E}{b} & {D}{b}) sent7: {E}{a} sent8: (x): ({F}x v ¬{G}x) -> {E}{c} sent9: ¬({I}{c} & {J}{c}) -> ¬{H}{c} sent10: (x): ¬{H}x -> (¬{A}x & ¬{B}x) sent11: ({F}{d} v ¬{G}{d}) s... | [
"sent3 -> int1: the ganoin brings.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the stearin is a pastorale.; sent6 -> int3: the stearin dodges transplant.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: {B}{a}; int1 & sent15 -> int2: {C}{b}; sent6 -> int3: {D}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the fact that the stearin does dodge transplant and it is a pastorale does not hold. | ¬({D}{b} & {C}{b}) | 9 | [
"sent11 -> int4: there exists something such that either it is a December or it is not a kind of a salvo or both.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the haymow is a sky.; sent10 -> int6: the haymow is not unsinkable and does not bring if it is not a crocolite.; sent1 -> int7: the fact that the haymow dodges osteopathy and eleg... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the stearin dodges transplant and it is a pastorale is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something does not dodge haymow that it does dodge osteopathy and it elegizes is not correct. sent2: the speed does dodge polyptoton and grits. sent3: the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. sent4: ... | sent3 -> int1: the ganoin brings.; int1 & sent15 -> int2: the stearin is a pastorale.; sent6 -> int3: the stearin dodges transplant.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the ganoin is not sinkable and does bring. | [
"if the ganoin brings the stearin is a pastorale.",
"the fact that the stearin is a sky and it dodges transplant is true."
] | [
"The ganoin does bring and is not sinkable.",
"The ganoin is not sinkable."
] | The ganoin is not sinkable. | the fact that the stearin is a sky and it dodges transplant is true. |
the apple is mayoral. | sent1: the macedoine is impure. sent2: the combatant is mayoral. sent3: the Laconian is a kind of a workpiece and is impure. sent4: the ouzo is mayoral. sent5: there exists something such that the fact that it is impure is not incorrect. sent6: something is a kind of a thorax and is impure if that it is not a quoits is... | {C}{b} | sent1: {A}{a} sent2: {C}{ge} sent3: ({DD}{hn} & {A}{hn}) sent4: {C}{fh} sent5: (Ex): {A}x sent6: (x): ¬{B}x -> ({L}x & {A}x) sent7: (Ex): ({HL}x & {GG}x) sent8: {A}{b} sent9: {C}{a} sent10: (x): ¬({B}x & {D}x) -> ¬{B}x sent11: (Ex): {FQ}x sent12: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> {C}{a} sent13: {DG}{b} sent14: {IE}{b} sent15: (Ex)... | [
"sent1 & sent19 -> int1: the macedoine is impure and it is a kind of a quoits.; int1 -> int2: the fact that there is something such that it is impure and it is a quoits is not false.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent1 & sent19 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ({A}x & {B}x);"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 19 | 0 | 19 | something is a kind of a toast that is a thorax. | (Ex): ({AO}x & {L}x) | 6 | [
"sent17 -> int3: the macedoine is a toast.; sent6 -> int4: if the macedoine is not a quoits it is a thorax that is impure.; sent10 -> int5: the macedoine is not a quoits if the fact that it is a quoits and it is animating is not right.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the apple is mayoral. ; $context$ = sent1: the macedoine is impure. sent2: the combatant is mayoral. sent3: the Laconian is a kind of a workpiece and is impure. sent4: the ouzo is mayoral. sent5: there exists something such that the fact that it is impure is not incorrect. sent6: something is a kind of a... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the macedoine is impure. | [
"the macedoine is a quoits."
] | [
"the macedoine is impure."
] | the macedoine is impure. | the macedoine is a quoits. |
that that the galacticness occurs and the tragedy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. | sent1: the retraction occurs and the breeziness occurs. sent2: if the recruiting hee-haw does not occur the fact that the metallic happens hold. sent3: if the necessariness does not occur then the fact that the speaking Dromaeosauridae occurs is true. sent4: the dodging Xenopodidae does not occur. sent5: the inversion ... | ¬({C} & {D}) | sent1: ({CO} & {CF}) sent2: ¬{CE} -> {IF} sent3: ¬{AB} -> {AQ} sent4: ¬{JK} sent5: ¬{HS} sent6: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent7: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent8: ({DN} & {T}) sent9: ¬{B} -> {C} sent10: ¬{BI} -> ({R} & {GK}) sent11: ¬{F} sent12: ¬{CJ} sent13: ({GM} & {HB}) | [
"sent6 -> int1: the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the galacticness happens.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: both the tragedy and the placation happens.; int3 -> int4: the tragedy occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 & sent9 -> int2: {C}; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: ({D} & {E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that that the galacticness occurs and the tragedy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the retraction occurs and the breeziness occurs. sent2: if the recruiting hee-haw does not occur the fact that the metallic happens hold. sent3: if the necessariness does not occur then the fact ... | sent6 -> int1: the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the galacticness happens.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: both the tragedy and the placation happens.; int3 -> int4: the tragedy occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the swooping cereal does not occur and the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur. | [
"that the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur prevents the non-galacticness.",
"if that the denotativeness does not occur is not incorrect both the tragedy and the placation happens.",
"the denotativeness does not occur."
] | [
"The swooping cereal doesn't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen.",
"The swooping cereals don't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen.",
"The swooping cereal does not happen."
] | The swooping cereal doesn't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen. | that the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur prevents the non-galacticness. |
that that the galacticness occurs and the tragedy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. | sent1: the retraction occurs and the breeziness occurs. sent2: if the recruiting hee-haw does not occur the fact that the metallic happens hold. sent3: if the necessariness does not occur then the fact that the speaking Dromaeosauridae occurs is true. sent4: the dodging Xenopodidae does not occur. sent5: the inversion ... | ¬({C} & {D}) | sent1: ({CO} & {CF}) sent2: ¬{CE} -> {IF} sent3: ¬{AB} -> {AQ} sent4: ¬{JK} sent5: ¬{HS} sent6: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent7: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent8: ({DN} & {T}) sent9: ¬{B} -> {C} sent10: ¬{BI} -> ({R} & {GK}) sent11: ¬{F} sent12: ¬{CJ} sent13: ({GM} & {HB}) | [
"sent6 -> int1: the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the galacticness happens.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: both the tragedy and the placation happens.; int3 -> int4: the tragedy occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 & sent9 -> int2: {C}; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: ({D} & {E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that that the galacticness occurs and the tragedy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the retraction occurs and the breeziness occurs. sent2: if the recruiting hee-haw does not occur the fact that the metallic happens hold. sent3: if the necessariness does not occur then the fact ... | sent6 -> int1: the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the galacticness happens.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: both the tragedy and the placation happens.; int3 -> int4: the tragedy occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the swooping cereal does not occur and the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur. | [
"that the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur prevents the non-galacticness.",
"if that the denotativeness does not occur is not incorrect both the tragedy and the placation happens.",
"the denotativeness does not occur."
] | [
"The swooping cereal doesn't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen.",
"The swooping cereals don't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen.",
"The swooping cereal does not happen."
] | The swooping cereals don't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen. | if that the denotativeness does not occur is not incorrect both the tragedy and the placation happens. |
that that the galacticness occurs and the tragedy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. | sent1: the retraction occurs and the breeziness occurs. sent2: if the recruiting hee-haw does not occur the fact that the metallic happens hold. sent3: if the necessariness does not occur then the fact that the speaking Dromaeosauridae occurs is true. sent4: the dodging Xenopodidae does not occur. sent5: the inversion ... | ¬({C} & {D}) | sent1: ({CO} & {CF}) sent2: ¬{CE} -> {IF} sent3: ¬{AB} -> {AQ} sent4: ¬{JK} sent5: ¬{HS} sent6: (¬{A} & ¬{B}) sent7: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent8: ({DN} & {T}) sent9: ¬{B} -> {C} sent10: ¬{BI} -> ({R} & {GK}) sent11: ¬{F} sent12: ¬{CJ} sent13: ({GM} & {HB}) | [
"sent6 -> int1: the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the galacticness happens.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: both the tragedy and the placation happens.; int3 -> int4: the tragedy occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 -> int1: ¬{B}; int1 & sent9 -> int2: {C}; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: ({D} & {E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 9 | 0 | 9 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that that the galacticness occurs and the tragedy happens is not incorrect is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the retraction occurs and the breeziness occurs. sent2: if the recruiting hee-haw does not occur the fact that the metallic happens hold. sent3: if the necessariness does not occur then the fact ... | sent6 -> int1: the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the galacticness happens.; sent7 & sent11 -> int3: both the tragedy and the placation happens.; int3 -> int4: the tragedy occurs.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the swooping cereal does not occur and the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur. | [
"that the dodging Tachyglossidae does not occur prevents the non-galacticness.",
"if that the denotativeness does not occur is not incorrect both the tragedy and the placation happens.",
"the denotativeness does not occur."
] | [
"The swooping cereal doesn't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen.",
"The swooping cereals don't happen and the dodging Tachyglossidae doesn't happen.",
"The swooping cereal does not happen."
] | The swooping cereal does not happen. | the denotativeness does not occur. |
both the non-cheliceralness and the underageness happens. | sent1: that the tracing does not occur is brought about by the dodging gamete or that the dodging setter does not occur or both. sent2: the conversing and the confession occurs if the macrencephalicness does not occur. sent3: that the conversing does not occur causes that the underageness occurs and the cheliceralness ... | (¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: ({L} v ¬{M}) -> ¬{K} sent2: ¬{G} -> ({E} & {F}) sent3: ¬{E} -> ({D} & {C}) sent4: ¬{G} -> (¬{E} & ¬{F}) sent5: ¬{K} -> ({J} & {I}) sent6: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{C} sent7: {D} sent8: {A} sent9: ¬{J} -> ¬({H} & {I}) sent10: {DA} sent11: ¬(¬{B} v {A}) -> ¬{HC} sent12: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent13: {I} -> ({H} & ¬{G}) sen... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | that the electricalness does not occur is not wrong. | ¬{HC} | 11 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = both the non-cheliceralness and the underageness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that the tracing does not occur is brought about by the dodging gamete or that the dodging setter does not occur or both. sent2: the conversing and the confession occurs if the macrencephalicness does not occur. sent3: that th... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the tasting occurs. | [
"the underageness happens."
] | [
"the tasting occurs."
] | the tasting occurs. | the underageness happens. |
the falcon does dodge Homer. | sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. sent4: the manikin is not invulnerable if there exists somet... | {C}{b} | sent1: ¬({I}{g} & ¬{J}{g}) -> {F}{d} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ({J}x & {K}x) sent4: (x): {J}x -> ¬{I}{e} sent5: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬{I}{e} -> ({H}{d} v {F}{d}) sent8: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> {A}{jg} sent10: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent11: ¬{K... | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hyp... | PROVED | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}); sent17 -> int4: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | the heliometer is dizygotic. | {A}{jg} | 12 | [
"sent21 -> int5: the Pneumovax does not dodge longbowman if that it dodge longbowman and it is not a Haitian does not hold.; sent25 -> int6: the fact that the Pneumovax does dodge longbowman but it is not a kind of a Haitian is not correct if the fact that it is a tenrec hold.; sent3 -> int7: the customer dodges So... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the falcon does dodge Homer. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. se... | sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothes... | DeductionInstance | the falcon is not a kind of a bailor if that the melosa does hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect. | [
"the fact that the melosa is a hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect.",
"something is not a materialist.",
"that the falcon is dizygotic is not incorrect if there is something such that it is not a materialist.",
"if something is not a kind of a bailor but it is dizygotic then it dodges Homer."
... | [
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare.",
"If the melosa does hare and it is incorrect, the falcon is not a bailor.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is an interstate.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is incorrect."
] | The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare. | the fact that the melosa is a hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect. |
the falcon does dodge Homer. | sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. sent4: the manikin is not invulnerable if there exists somet... | {C}{b} | sent1: ¬({I}{g} & ¬{J}{g}) -> {F}{d} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ({J}x & {K}x) sent4: (x): {J}x -> ¬{I}{e} sent5: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬{I}{e} -> ({H}{d} v {F}{d}) sent8: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> {A}{jg} sent10: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent11: ¬{K... | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hyp... | PROVED | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}); sent17 -> int4: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | the heliometer is dizygotic. | {A}{jg} | 12 | [
"sent21 -> int5: the Pneumovax does not dodge longbowman if that it dodge longbowman and it is not a Haitian does not hold.; sent25 -> int6: the fact that the Pneumovax does dodge longbowman but it is not a kind of a Haitian is not correct if the fact that it is a tenrec hold.; sent3 -> int7: the customer dodges So... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the falcon does dodge Homer. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. se... | sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothes... | DeductionInstance | the falcon is not a kind of a bailor if that the melosa does hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect. | [
"the fact that the melosa is a hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect.",
"something is not a materialist.",
"that the falcon is dizygotic is not incorrect if there is something such that it is not a materialist.",
"if something is not a kind of a bailor but it is dizygotic then it dodges Homer."
... | [
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare.",
"If the melosa does hare and it is incorrect, the falcon is not a bailor.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is an interstate.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is incorrect."
] | If the melosa does hare and it is incorrect, the falcon is not a bailor. | something is not a materialist. |
the falcon does dodge Homer. | sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. sent4: the manikin is not invulnerable if there exists somet... | {C}{b} | sent1: ¬({I}{g} & ¬{J}{g}) -> {F}{d} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ({J}x & {K}x) sent4: (x): {J}x -> ¬{I}{e} sent5: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬{I}{e} -> ({H}{d} v {F}{d}) sent8: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> {A}{jg} sent10: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent11: ¬{K... | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hyp... | PROVED | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}); sent17 -> int4: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | the heliometer is dizygotic. | {A}{jg} | 12 | [
"sent21 -> int5: the Pneumovax does not dodge longbowman if that it dodge longbowman and it is not a Haitian does not hold.; sent25 -> int6: the fact that the Pneumovax does dodge longbowman but it is not a kind of a Haitian is not correct if the fact that it is a tenrec hold.; sent3 -> int7: the customer dodges So... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the falcon does dodge Homer. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. se... | sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothes... | DeductionInstance | the falcon is not a kind of a bailor if that the melosa does hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect. | [
"the fact that the melosa is a hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect.",
"something is not a materialist.",
"that the falcon is dizygotic is not incorrect if there is something such that it is not a materialist.",
"if something is not a kind of a bailor but it is dizygotic then it dodges Homer."
... | [
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare.",
"If the melosa does hare and it is incorrect, the falcon is not a bailor.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is an interstate.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is incorrect."
] | The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is an interstate. | that the falcon is dizygotic is not incorrect if there is something such that it is not a materialist. |
the falcon does dodge Homer. | sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. sent4: the manikin is not invulnerable if there exists somet... | {C}{b} | sent1: ¬({I}{g} & ¬{J}{g}) -> {F}{d} sent2: (x): (¬{AA}x & {C}x) -> {B}x sent3: (x): ({J}x & {K}x) sent4: (x): {J}x -> ¬{I}{e} sent5: ¬{D}{c} -> ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent6: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{b} sent7: ¬{I}{e} -> ({H}{d} v {F}{d}) sent8: ¬{E}{c} -> ¬{D}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> {A}{jg} sent10: (Ex): ¬{D}x sent11: ¬{K... | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hyp... | PROVED | [
"sent6 & sent20 -> int1: ¬{B}{b}; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: {A}{b}; int1 & int2 -> int3: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}); sent17 -> int4: (¬{B}{b} & {A}{b}) -> {C}{b}; int3 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 20 | 0 | 20 | the heliometer is dizygotic. | {A}{jg} | 12 | [
"sent21 -> int5: the Pneumovax does not dodge longbowman if that it dodge longbowman and it is not a Haitian does not hold.; sent25 -> int6: the fact that the Pneumovax does dodge longbowman but it is not a kind of a Haitian is not correct if the fact that it is a tenrec hold.; sent3 -> int7: the customer dodges So... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the falcon does dodge Homer. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the semiprofessional is invulnerable but it does not dodge Sorbian is wrong then the Homer is a tenrec. sent2: something that is not a kind of a hare and dodges Homer is a bailor. sent3: everything does dodge Sorbian and it does recruit falcon. se... | sent6 & sent20 -> int1: the falcon is not a bailor.; sent10 & sent13 -> int2: that the falcon is dizygotic is correct.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic.; sent17 -> int4: if the falcon is not a bailor but it is dizygotic the fact that it dodges Homer is right.; int3 & int4 -> hypothes... | DeductionInstance | the falcon is not a kind of a bailor if that the melosa does hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect. | [
"the fact that the melosa is a hare and it is a kind of an interstate is incorrect.",
"something is not a materialist.",
"that the falcon is dizygotic is not incorrect if there is something such that it is not a materialist.",
"if something is not a kind of a bailor but it is dizygotic then it dodges Homer."
... | [
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare.",
"If the melosa does hare and it is incorrect, the falcon is not a bailor.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is an interstate.",
"The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is incorrect."
] | The falcon is not a bailor if the melosa does hare and it is incorrect. | if something is not a kind of a bailor but it is dizygotic then it dodges Homer. |
either the matricide does not occur or the gauntlet happens or both. | sent1: the refocusing occurs. sent2: the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs. | (¬{C} v {D}) | sent1: {B} sent2: {A} -> ¬{C} | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = either the matricide does not occur or the gauntlet happens or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the refocusing occurs. sent2: the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs. | [
"the refocusing occurs."
] | [
"the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs."
] | the matricide does not occur if the recruiting humin occurs. | the refocusing occurs. |
the butt does not swoop cosmetic. | sent1: there is something such that it is not costive. sent2: the lineman is not a rind. sent3: the lineman is not costive if something that does not recruit Synentognathi does not swoop cosmetic. sent4: a coal swoops cosmetic. sent5: that the lineman does not recruit Synentognathi is not incorrect if something does no... | ¬{A}{a} | sent1: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent2: ¬{BQ}{aa} sent3: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{A}x) -> ¬{AB}{aa} sent4: (x): {B}x -> {A}x sent5: (x): (¬{A}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{AA}{aa} sent6: ¬(¬{C}{a} & {CU}{a}) sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: (x): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent9: (Ex): ({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent10: ¬{E}{b} -> ({C}{b} & ¬{D}{b... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 11 | 0 | 11 | the laryngopharynx is not a kind of an insolvency and it does not swoop Hargeisa. | (¬{CU}{ae} & ¬{DT}{ae}) | 3 | [
"sent6 -> int1: there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-liliaceous an insolvency does not hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the butt does not swoop cosmetic. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not costive. sent2: the lineman is not a rind. sent3: the lineman is not costive if something that does not recruit Synentognathi does not swoop cosmetic. sent4: a coal swoops cosmetic. sent5: that the lineman does ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the lineman is not a rind. | [
"the lineman is not costive if something that does not recruit Synentognathi does not swoop cosmetic."
] | [
"the lineman is not a rind."
] | the lineman is not a rind. | the lineman is not costive if something that does not recruit Synentognathi does not swoop cosmetic. |
there exists something such that it swoops monetarism or it does not dodge 1870s or both. | sent1: the courlan is not abiogenetic. sent2: the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a deaf or it does not speak chinked or both. sent4: the zinc hums if there is something such that the fact that it is a Key and/or is not strategics is ... | (Ex): ({A}x v ¬{B}x) | sent1: ¬{HH}{a} sent2: ({A}{a} v {B}{a}) sent3: (Ex): ({R}x v ¬{JD}x) sent4: (x): ¬({H}x v ¬{G}x) -> {F}{f} sent5: ¬{AA}{aa} sent6: {A}{c} -> {A}{b} sent7: (x): {I}x sent8: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{B}{b} & {DN}{b}) sent9: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {DN}x) -> ¬{DN}{a} sent10: (x): ¬({E}x & {D}x) -> {C}{d} sent11: (x): {I}x -> ¬({H}x v ¬{G}x) ... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 13 | 0 | 13 | the courlan does not speak Humulus. | ¬{DN}{a} | 15 | [
"sent7 -> int1: the cloud does recruit stint.; sent11 -> int2: the fact that the cloud is a kind of a Key and/or it is not strategics does not hold if that it does recruit stint is not wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: that the cloud is a Key and/or it is not strategics is not right.; int3 -> int4: there exists nothing ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it swoops monetarism or it does not dodge 1870s or both. ; $context$ = sent1: the courlan is not abiogenetic. sent2: the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both. sent3: there is something such that it is a kind of a deaf or it does not speak chink... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both. | [
"the courlan is not abiogenetic."
] | [
"the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both."
] | the courlan either does swoop monetarism or does dodge 1870s or both. | the courlan is not abiogenetic. |
the beeswax is not a kind of a sixtieth or is not a Petaurus or both. | sent1: that the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or is not a Petaurus is not right if the screwtop does not swoop beeswax. sent2: the sieve does not recruit chondrichthian if the fact that it is not a numeral and recruit chondrichthian is incorrect. sent3: the fact that if something is legless but it does not read then it... | (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent2: ¬(¬{K}{f} & {I}{f}) -> ¬{I}{f} sent3: (x): ({G}x & ¬{H}x) -> ¬{F}x sent4: ¬{F}{e} -> ¬({D}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) sent5: {A}{a} sent6: {AC}{aa} sent7: ¬{I}{f} -> ({G}{e} & ¬{H}{e}) sent8: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) sent9: ¬({D}{d} v ¬{E}{d}) -> ¬{D}{c} sent10: {A}{a} -> ({AA}... | [
"sent8 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent8 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the fact that that either the beeswax is not a sixtieth or it is not a Petaurus or both is not true is not false. | ¬(¬{AA}{b} v ¬{AB}{b}) | 11 | [
"sent3 -> int1: if the spear is legless but it does not read it is not nonalcoholic.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the beeswax is not a kind of a sixtieth or is not a Petaurus or both. ; $context$ = sent1: that the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or is not a Petaurus is not right if the screwtop does not swoop beeswax. sent2: the sieve does not recruit chondrichthian if the fact that it is not a numeral and recruit cho... | sent8 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or it is not a Petaurus if the screwtop does swoop beeswax. | [
"the screwtop does swoop beeswax."
] | [
"the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or it is not a Petaurus if the screwtop does swoop beeswax."
] | the beeswax is not a sixtieth and/or it is not a Petaurus if the screwtop does swoop beeswax. | the screwtop does swoop beeswax. |
the SLS does dodge masted. | sent1: everything is not holistic. sent2: the fact that if something dodges masted then the fact that either it is not a coupon or it is a bylaw or both is false hold. sent3: the SLS is not a podetium. sent4: the SLS does not swoop state. sent5: something is not a Vanbrugh if it is alkahestic and/or it is not a kind of... | {A}{a} | sent1: (x): ¬{E}x sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{HE}x v {IR}x) sent3: ¬{AB}{a} sent4: ¬{B}{a} sent5: (x): ({D}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{E}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent8: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent9: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent10: {I}{c} -> ¬({H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) sent11: ¬{E}{a} -> (... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the SLS does dodge masted.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: either the SLS is not a crocodile or it is a podetium or both.; sent13 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the SLS is not a crocodile and/or is a podetium is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> h... | DISPROVED | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); sent13 & sent4 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | that the hairpin is not a coupon or a bylaw or both is false. | ¬(¬{HE}{ht} v {IR}{ht}) | 10 | [
"sent2 -> int4: the fact that the hairpin is not a kind of a coupon and/or it is a bylaw is not right if that it dodges masted is right.; sent7 -> int5: the hairpin does dodge masted and it does swoop state if it is not a Vanbrugh.; sent5 -> int6: if the hairpin is not non-alkahestic or it is not a Vanbrugh or both... | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the SLS does dodge masted. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is not holistic. sent2: the fact that if something dodges masted then the fact that either it is not a coupon or it is a bylaw or both is false hold. sent3: the SLS is not a podetium. sent4: the SLS does not swoop state. sent5: something is not a... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the SLS does dodge masted.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: either the SLS is not a crocodile or it is a podetium or both.; sent13 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the SLS is not a crocodile and/or is a podetium is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypoth... | DeductionInstance | if the SLS dodges masted it is not a crocodile and/or it is a podetium. | [
"if the SLS does not swoop state then the fact that it either is not a crocodile or is a podetium or both is incorrect.",
"the SLS does not swoop state."
] | [
"If the SLS dodges masted it is either a crocodile or a podetium.",
"If the SLS dodges masted, it is either a crocodile or a podetium."
] | If the SLS dodges masted it is either a crocodile or a podetium. | if the SLS does not swoop state then the fact that it either is not a crocodile or is a podetium or both is incorrect. |
the SLS does dodge masted. | sent1: everything is not holistic. sent2: the fact that if something dodges masted then the fact that either it is not a coupon or it is a bylaw or both is false hold. sent3: the SLS is not a podetium. sent4: the SLS does not swoop state. sent5: something is not a Vanbrugh if it is alkahestic and/or it is not a kind of... | {A}{a} | sent1: (x): ¬{E}x sent2: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{HE}x v {IR}x) sent3: ¬{AB}{a} sent4: ¬{B}{a} sent5: (x): ({D}x v ¬{C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent6: (x): ¬{F}x -> ¬{E}{a} sent7: (x): ¬{C}x -> ({A}x & {B}x) sent8: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent9: {A}{a} -> (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent10: {I}{c} -> ¬({H}{b} & ¬{G}{b}) sent11: ¬{E}{a} -> (... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the SLS does dodge masted.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: either the SLS is not a crocodile or it is a podetium or both.; sent13 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the SLS is not a crocodile and/or is a podetium is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> h... | DISPROVED | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: (¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); sent13 & sent4 -> int2: ¬(¬{AA}{a} v {AB}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 13 | 0 | 13 | that the hairpin is not a coupon or a bylaw or both is false. | ¬(¬{HE}{ht} v {IR}{ht}) | 10 | [
"sent2 -> int4: the fact that the hairpin is not a kind of a coupon and/or it is a bylaw is not right if that it dodges masted is right.; sent7 -> int5: the hairpin does dodge masted and it does swoop state if it is not a Vanbrugh.; sent5 -> int6: if the hairpin is not non-alkahestic or it is not a Vanbrugh or both... | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = the SLS does dodge masted. ; $context$ = sent1: everything is not holistic. sent2: the fact that if something dodges masted then the fact that either it is not a coupon or it is a bylaw or both is false hold. sent3: the SLS is not a podetium. sent4: the SLS does not swoop state. sent5: something is not a... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the SLS does dodge masted.; sent9 & assump1 -> int1: either the SLS is not a crocodile or it is a podetium or both.; sent13 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the SLS is not a crocodile and/or is a podetium is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> hypoth... | DeductionInstance | if the SLS dodges masted it is not a crocodile and/or it is a podetium. | [
"if the SLS does not swoop state then the fact that it either is not a crocodile or is a podetium or both is incorrect.",
"the SLS does not swoop state."
] | [
"If the SLS dodges masted it is either a crocodile or a podetium.",
"If the SLS dodges masted, it is either a crocodile or a podetium."
] | If the SLS dodges masted, it is either a crocodile or a podetium. | the SLS does not swoop state. |
the preempting does not occur. | sent1: if the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs then that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism happens does not hold. sent2: the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs. | ¬{E} | sent1: {B} -> ¬({C} & ¬{D}) sent2: (¬{A} & {B}) | [
"sent2 -> int1: the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs.; sent1 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism occurs is not true.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 -> int1: {B}; sent1 & int1 -> int2: ¬({C} & ¬{D});"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 0 | 0 | 0 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the preempting does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs then that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism happens does not hold. sent2: the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs. | [
"if the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs then that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism happens does not hold."
] | [
"the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs."
] | the recruiting behaviorism does not occur and the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs. | if the recruiting Sanguinaria occurs then that the recruiting Altaic but not the swooping expressionism happens does not hold. |
the fife dodges Monterey and is not a PAYE. | sent1: the fact that something does emigrate but it is not bladdery is incorrect if it is a Bretagne. sent2: the rayon freezes. | ({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) | sent1: (x): {A}x -> ¬({CJ}x & ¬{FU}x) sent2: {B}{b} | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 1 | 0 | 1 | that the craniometer does emigrate and is not bladdery is not right. | ¬({CJ}{ap} & ¬{FU}{ap}) | 4 | [
"sent1 -> int1: if that the craniometer is not a kind of a Bretagne is false then the fact that it does emigrate and is not bladdery is not correct.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fife dodges Monterey and is not a PAYE. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something does emigrate but it is not bladdery is incorrect if it is a Bretagne. sent2: the rayon freezes. ; $proof$ = | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the rayon freezes. | [
"the fact that something does emigrate but it is not bladdery is incorrect if it is a Bretagne."
] | [
"the rayon freezes."
] | the rayon freezes. | the fact that something does emigrate but it is not bladdery is incorrect if it is a Bretagne. |
the fact that the salute does not occur is right. | sent1: the slavery occurs. sent2: the theming occurs. sent3: the saluting does not occur if the accountancy does not occur. sent4: that the connection does not occur causes that the neurobiologicalness does not occur and the suppling does not occur. sent5: the dodging lunchtime happens if the traditionalism happens. se... | ¬{C} | sent1: {B} sent2: {FO} sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬{C} sent4: ¬{F} -> (¬{D} & ¬{E}) sent5: {AR} -> {EN} sent6: {A} -> {C} sent7: {ED} sent8: ¬{D} -> ({B} & {C}) sent9: ({A} & {B}) | [
"sent9 -> int1: the accountancy occurs.; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 -> int1: {A}; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 7 | the salute does not occur. | ¬{C} | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the salute does not occur is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the slavery occurs. sent2: the theming occurs. sent3: the saluting does not occur if the accountancy does not occur. sent4: that the connection does not occur causes that the neurobiologicalness does not occur and the suppling does no... | sent9 -> int1: the accountancy occurs.; sent6 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the accountancy and the slavery happens. | [
"if the accountancy happens the salute occurs."
] | [
"the accountancy and the slavery happens."
] | the accountancy and the slavery happens. | if the accountancy happens the salute occurs. |
the fact that the roadhouse is not a kind of a stifle hold. | sent1: that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS. sent2: the Donatist is a kind of non-nutritional thing that does not revamp if the streptocarpus does germinate. sent3: if the Donatist is non-nutritional thing that does not revamp the muton revamp. sent4: if the linocut is unrespectable i... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent2: {G}{e} -> (¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent3: (¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> {E}{c} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: {H}{e} -> {G}{e} sent7: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) sent9: {A}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the linocut is a MS.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the roadhouse is not a stifle. | ¬{C}{b} | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the roadhouse is not a kind of a stifle hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS. sent2: the Donatist is a kind of non-nutritional thing that does not revamp if the streptocarpus does germinate. sent3: if the Donatist is non-nutritio... | sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the linocut is a MS.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the linocut is unrespectable it is a MS. | [
"the linocut is unrespectable.",
"that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS."
] | [
"The linocut is unrespectable.",
"It is aMS if the linocut is unrespectable."
] | The linocut is unrespectable. | the linocut is unrespectable. |
the fact that the roadhouse is not a kind of a stifle hold. | sent1: that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS. sent2: the Donatist is a kind of non-nutritional thing that does not revamp if the streptocarpus does germinate. sent3: if the Donatist is non-nutritional thing that does not revamp the muton revamp. sent4: if the linocut is unrespectable i... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: {B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent2: {G}{e} -> (¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent3: (¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) -> {E}{c} sent4: {A}{a} -> {B}{a} sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{C}{b} sent6: {H}{e} -> {G}{e} sent7: (x): {E}x -> {D}x sent8: (Ex): ¬(¬{I}x & ¬{J}x) sent9: {A}{a} | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the linocut is a MS.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 & sent9 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the roadhouse is not a stifle. | ¬{C}{b} | 5 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the roadhouse is not a kind of a stifle hold. ; $context$ = sent1: that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS. sent2: the Donatist is a kind of non-nutritional thing that does not revamp if the streptocarpus does germinate. sent3: if the Donatist is non-nutritio... | sent4 & sent9 -> int1: the linocut is a MS.; sent1 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the linocut is unrespectable it is a MS. | [
"the linocut is unrespectable.",
"that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS."
] | [
"The linocut is unrespectable.",
"It is aMS if the linocut is unrespectable."
] | It is aMS if the linocut is unrespectable. | that the roadhouse is a stifle is true if the linocut is a kind of a MS. |
that the lip-gloss is both a sherry and a builder is incorrect. | sent1: if the pith is not a kind of a Assamese that the lip-gloss is a kind of a sherry and it is a builder does not hold. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a Rhinobatidae the vigilante recruits Cunningham and it does team. sent3: the signor is both an antigen and a guillemot. sent4: if something is ... | ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | sent1: ¬{C}{b} -> ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) sent2: (x): ¬{J}x -> ({G}{e} & {I}{e}) sent3: ({FC}{bn} & {GN}{bn}) sent4: (x): {M}x -> ¬({L}{f} & {N}{f}) sent5: (Ex): {M}x sent6: ¬({L}{f} & {N}{f}) -> ¬{L}{f} sent7: (¬{D}{c} & ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent8: {A}{a} sent9: (x): ¬{F}x -> (¬{D}x & ¬{E}x) sent10: {B}{a} sent11: {K}{f} se... | [
"sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 1 | 1 | 10 | 0 | 10 | that the lip-gloss is a sherry and it is a builder is incorrect. | ¬({A}{a} & {B}{a}) | 13 | [
"sent9 -> int1: if the tampion is not nonarbitrable then it is non-majors and is not a kind of a yodh.; sent5 & sent4 -> int2: that the Moro is corvine and does recruit escutcheon is false.; sent6 & int2 -> int3: the Moro is non-corvine.; sent11 & int3 -> int4: the Moro does continue and is not corvine.; sent12 & i... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the lip-gloss is both a sherry and a builder is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pith is not a kind of a Assamese that the lip-gloss is a kind of a sherry and it is a builder does not hold. sent2: if there exists something such that it is not a Rhinobatidae the vigilante recruits Cunningham an... | sent8 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the lip-gloss is a sherry. | [
"the lip-gloss is a kind of a builder."
] | [
"the lip-gloss is a sherry."
] | the lip-gloss is a sherry. | the lip-gloss is a kind of a builder. |
the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. | sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the length is a kind of a patient then the phosphatase is a oxheart. sent4: the phosphatas... | ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬(¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent3: {D}{c} -> {C}{b} sent4: {D}{b} sent5: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent6: {A}{c} sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent11: {E}{a} -> {A}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {C}{b} sent13: {... | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent14 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: {C}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the lengt... | sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat. | [
"if a non-arachnoid thing is not a kind of an overcoat then the dimorphism is not a kind of a sherbert.",
"if the dimorphism is not a sherbert then the phosphatase is holy.",
"if that the length does not swoop A-line and is not patient does not hold the phosphatase is a oxheart.",
"that the length does not sw... | [
"It is not an overcoat and it is not arachnoid.",
"It isn't an overcoat and it isn't arachnoid.",
"It is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat.",
"It's not an overcoat and it's not arachnoid."
] | It is not an overcoat and it is not arachnoid. | if a non-arachnoid thing is not a kind of an overcoat then the dimorphism is not a kind of a sherbert. |
the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. | sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the length is a kind of a patient then the phosphatase is a oxheart. sent4: the phosphatas... | ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬(¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent3: {D}{c} -> {C}{b} sent4: {D}{b} sent5: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent6: {A}{c} sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent11: {E}{a} -> {A}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {C}{b} sent13: {... | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent14 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: {C}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the lengt... | sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat. | [
"if a non-arachnoid thing is not a kind of an overcoat then the dimorphism is not a kind of a sherbert.",
"if the dimorphism is not a sherbert then the phosphatase is holy.",
"if that the length does not swoop A-line and is not patient does not hold the phosphatase is a oxheart.",
"that the length does not sw... | [
"It is not an overcoat and it is not arachnoid.",
"It isn't an overcoat and it isn't arachnoid.",
"It is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat.",
"It's not an overcoat and it's not arachnoid."
] | It isn't an overcoat and it isn't arachnoid. | if the dimorphism is not a sherbert then the phosphatase is holy. |
the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. | sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the length is a kind of a patient then the phosphatase is a oxheart. sent4: the phosphatas... | ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬(¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent3: {D}{c} -> {C}{b} sent4: {D}{b} sent5: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent6: {A}{c} sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent11: {E}{a} -> {A}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {C}{b} sent13: {... | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent14 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: {C}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the lengt... | sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat. | [
"if a non-arachnoid thing is not a kind of an overcoat then the dimorphism is not a kind of a sherbert.",
"if the dimorphism is not a sherbert then the phosphatase is holy.",
"if that the length does not swoop A-line and is not patient does not hold the phosphatase is a oxheart.",
"that the length does not sw... | [
"It is not an overcoat and it is not arachnoid.",
"It isn't an overcoat and it isn't arachnoid.",
"It is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat.",
"It's not an overcoat and it's not arachnoid."
] | It is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat. | if that the length does not swoop A-line and is not patient does not hold the phosphatase is a oxheart. |
the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. | sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the length is a kind of a patient then the phosphatase is a oxheart. sent4: the phosphatas... | ({B}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: ¬(¬{E}{c} & {D}{c}) sent3: {D}{c} -> {C}{b} sent4: {D}{b} sent5: ¬(¬{A}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent6: {A}{c} sent7: (x): (¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent8: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) sent9: (Ex): ¬{AA}x sent10: (Ex): ¬{AB}x sent11: {E}{a} -> {A}{c} sent12: ¬(¬{E}{c} & ¬{D}{c}) -> {C}{b} sent13: {... | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent16 & sent7 -> int1: ¬{A}{a}; int1 & sent14 -> int2: {B}{b}; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: {C}{b}; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 11 | 0 | 11 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the phosphatase is holy and is a kind of a oxheart. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a arachnoid and it is a kind of an overcoat is not false. sent2: that that the length does not swoop A-line but it is a patient is not incorrect is not right. sent3: if the lengt... | sent16 & sent7 -> int1: the dimorphism is not a sherbert.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: the phosphatase is holy.; sent12 & sent8 -> int3: the phosphatase is a oxheart.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that it is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat. | [
"if a non-arachnoid thing is not a kind of an overcoat then the dimorphism is not a kind of a sherbert.",
"if the dimorphism is not a sherbert then the phosphatase is holy.",
"if that the length does not swoop A-line and is not patient does not hold the phosphatase is a oxheart.",
"that the length does not sw... | [
"It is not an overcoat and it is not arachnoid.",
"It isn't an overcoat and it isn't arachnoid.",
"It is not arachnoid and it is not an overcoat.",
"It's not an overcoat and it's not arachnoid."
] | It's not an overcoat and it's not arachnoid. | that the length does not swoop A-line and is not a patient is incorrect. |
the rangpur is not comparable. | sent1: the thrombolytic is not comparable if the rangpur is deniable and is a mulloway. sent2: the thrombolytic is a sphenoid. sent3: the thrombolytic is a mulloway. sent4: the rangpur is scentless. sent5: the rangpur is cystic. sent6: the fact that the rangpur is Senecan is correct. sent7: the rangpur is not deniable ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: {CS}{a} sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {ER}{b} sent5: {DB}{b} sent6: {HE}{b} sent7: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent8: {C}{a} sent9: ¬{C}{gb} sent10: {A}{a} sent11: {C}{cb} sent12: ¬{C}{du} sent13: {A}{ap} sent14: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent15: ¬{C}{da} sent16: {CR}{a} sent17: ({... | [
"sent10 & sent3 -> int1: the thrombolytic is deniable and it is a mulloway.; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent10 & sent3 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the rangpur is not comparable. ; $context$ = sent1: the thrombolytic is not comparable if the rangpur is deniable and is a mulloway. sent2: the thrombolytic is a sphenoid. sent3: the thrombolytic is a mulloway. sent4: the rangpur is scentless. sent5: the rangpur is cystic. sent6: the fact that the rangpu... | sent10 & sent3 -> int1: the thrombolytic is deniable and it is a mulloway.; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the thrombolytic is deniable. | [
"the thrombolytic is a mulloway.",
"the rangpur is not comparable if the thrombolytic is a kind of deniable thing that is a mulloway."
] | [
"The disease is deniable.",
"Thelytic is deniable."
] | The disease is deniable. | the thrombolytic is a mulloway. |
the rangpur is not comparable. | sent1: the thrombolytic is not comparable if the rangpur is deniable and is a mulloway. sent2: the thrombolytic is a sphenoid. sent3: the thrombolytic is a mulloway. sent4: the rangpur is scentless. sent5: the rangpur is cystic. sent6: the fact that the rangpur is Senecan is correct. sent7: the rangpur is not deniable ... | ¬{C}{b} | sent1: ({A}{b} & {B}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent2: {CS}{a} sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {ER}{b} sent5: {DB}{b} sent6: {HE}{b} sent7: ({C}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{A}{b} sent8: {C}{a} sent9: ¬{C}{gb} sent10: {A}{a} sent11: {C}{cb} sent12: ¬{C}{du} sent13: {A}{ap} sent14: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{b} sent15: ¬{C}{da} sent16: {CR}{a} sent17: ({... | [
"sent10 & sent3 -> int1: the thrombolytic is deniable and it is a mulloway.; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent10 & sent3 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 2 | 2 | 20 | 0 | 20 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the rangpur is not comparable. ; $context$ = sent1: the thrombolytic is not comparable if the rangpur is deniable and is a mulloway. sent2: the thrombolytic is a sphenoid. sent3: the thrombolytic is a mulloway. sent4: the rangpur is scentless. sent5: the rangpur is cystic. sent6: the fact that the rangpu... | sent10 & sent3 -> int1: the thrombolytic is deniable and it is a mulloway.; sent14 & int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the thrombolytic is deniable. | [
"the thrombolytic is a mulloway.",
"the rangpur is not comparable if the thrombolytic is a kind of deniable thing that is a mulloway."
] | [
"The disease is deniable.",
"Thelytic is deniable."
] | Thelytic is deniable. | the rangpur is not comparable if the thrombolytic is a kind of deniable thing that is a mulloway. |
the knob does not swoop Gambian. | sent1: that the knob swoops cornered and it does swoop Gambian is wrong. sent2: the aquavit is not a Polyodon. sent3: something does not swoop Gambian but it is a Polyodon if it is a kind of a Malebranche. sent4: if something is a kind of a flats the aquavit swoops Gambian. sent5: the knob swoops Gambian if there exist... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: ¬({AA}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent4: (x): {AB}x -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (Ex): ({HN}x & ¬{BL}x) sent8: {A}{l} sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {A}x) | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the aquavit swoops cornered but it is not a flats is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it does swoop cornered and is not a kind of a flats is false.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the knob does not swoop Gambian. | ¬{B}{b} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int3: that the aquavit does not swoop Gambian and is the Polyodon if the aquavit is a Malebranche is true.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the knob does not swoop Gambian. ; $context$ = sent1: that the knob swoops cornered and it does swoop Gambian is wrong. sent2: the aquavit is not a Polyodon. sent3: something does not swoop Gambian but it is a Polyodon if it is a kind of a Malebranche. sent4: if something is a kind of a flats the aquavit... | sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the aquavit swoops cornered but it is not a flats is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it does swoop cornered and is not a kind of a flats is false.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that if the aquavit is not the Polyodon then the fact that the aquavit does swoop cornered and is not flats is false hold. | [
"the aquavit is not a Polyodon.",
"the knob swoops Gambian if there exists something such that that it swoops cornered and is not a kind of a flats is not correct."
] | [
"The fact that the aquavit does swoop cornered and is not flats is false.",
"The fact that the aquavit swoops cornered and is not flats is false."
] | The fact that the aquavit does swoop cornered and is not flats is false. | the aquavit is not a Polyodon. |
the knob does not swoop Gambian. | sent1: that the knob swoops cornered and it does swoop Gambian is wrong. sent2: the aquavit is not a Polyodon. sent3: something does not swoop Gambian but it is a Polyodon if it is a kind of a Malebranche. sent4: if something is a kind of a flats the aquavit swoops Gambian. sent5: the knob swoops Gambian if there exist... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: ¬({AA}{b} & {B}{b}) sent2: ¬{A}{a} sent3: (x): {C}x -> (¬{B}x & {A}x) sent4: (x): {AB}x -> {B}{a} sent5: (x): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> {B}{b} sent6: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent7: (Ex): ({HN}x & ¬{BL}x) sent8: {A}{l} sent9: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & {A}x) | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the aquavit swoops cornered but it is not a flats is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it does swoop cornered and is not a kind of a flats is false.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent6 & sent2 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); int1 -> int2: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x); int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 6 | 0 | 6 | the knob does not swoop Gambian. | ¬{B}{b} | 6 | [
"sent3 -> int3: that the aquavit does not swoop Gambian and is the Polyodon if the aquavit is a Malebranche is true.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the knob does not swoop Gambian. ; $context$ = sent1: that the knob swoops cornered and it does swoop Gambian is wrong. sent2: the aquavit is not a Polyodon. sent3: something does not swoop Gambian but it is a Polyodon if it is a kind of a Malebranche. sent4: if something is a kind of a flats the aquavit... | sent6 & sent2 -> int1: that the aquavit swoops cornered but it is not a flats is not correct.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that that it does swoop cornered and is not a kind of a flats is false.; int2 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that if the aquavit is not the Polyodon then the fact that the aquavit does swoop cornered and is not flats is false hold. | [
"the aquavit is not a Polyodon.",
"the knob swoops Gambian if there exists something such that that it swoops cornered and is not a kind of a flats is not correct."
] | [
"The fact that the aquavit does swoop cornered and is not flats is false.",
"The fact that the aquavit swoops cornered and is not flats is false."
] | The fact that the aquavit swoops cornered and is not flats is false. | the knob swoops Gambian if there exists something such that that it swoops cornered and is not a kind of a flats is not correct. |
the terpene is not entrepreneurial. | sent1: if the fact that the missal is indirect and it does corrupt is wrong then the terpene is non-adverbial. sent2: the bascule does not swoop cosmetic and is not a kind of a kishke if it is a weekend. sent3: if the missal is not Dickensian then the bascule is a kind of an adverbial. sent4: the fact that something is... | ¬{D}{c} | sent1: ¬({F}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent2: {K}{b} -> (¬{J}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x & {E}x) sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): ¬({E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}x & {I}x) sent8: (x): ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) -> {D}x sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) sent10: (Ex): ... | [
"sent5 & sent14 -> int1: the missal is not Dickensian.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the bascule is an adverbial but not Dickensian.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 & sent14 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent16 & int1 -> int2: ({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}); sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the terpene is entrepreneurial. | {D}{c} | 10 | [
"sent8 -> int3: if the fact that the terpene is gastric or it is not Dickensian or both is not correct then it is entrepreneurial.; sent9 -> int4: if the terpene is not an adverbial that it is gastric or it is not Dickensian or both is not true.; sent4 -> int5: if the missal is not ipsilateral then the fact that it... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the terpene is not entrepreneurial. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the missal is indirect and it does corrupt is wrong then the terpene is non-adverbial. sent2: the bascule does not swoop cosmetic and is not a kind of a kishke if it is a weekend. sent3: if the missal is not Dickensian then the bas... | sent5 & sent14 -> int1: the missal is not Dickensian.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the bascule is an adverbial but not Dickensian.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the missal is not gastric it is not Dickensian. | [
"the missal is not gastric.",
"if that the missal is not Dickensian is not incorrect the bascule is a kind of an adverbial but it is not Dickensian.",
"if the bascule is a kind of adverbial thing that is not Dickensian the terpene is not entrepreneurial."
] | [
"The missal is not Dickensian.",
"The missal is not Dickensian if it is not gastric.",
"It is not Dickensian if the missal is not gastric."
] | The missal is not Dickensian. | the missal is not gastric. |
the terpene is not entrepreneurial. | sent1: if the fact that the missal is indirect and it does corrupt is wrong then the terpene is non-adverbial. sent2: the bascule does not swoop cosmetic and is not a kind of a kishke if it is a weekend. sent3: if the missal is not Dickensian then the bascule is a kind of an adverbial. sent4: the fact that something is... | ¬{D}{c} | sent1: ¬({F}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent2: {K}{b} -> (¬{J}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x & {E}x) sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): ¬({E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}x & {I}x) sent8: (x): ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) -> {D}x sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) sent10: (Ex): ... | [
"sent5 & sent14 -> int1: the missal is not Dickensian.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the bascule is an adverbial but not Dickensian.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 & sent14 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent16 & int1 -> int2: ({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}); sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the terpene is entrepreneurial. | {D}{c} | 10 | [
"sent8 -> int3: if the fact that the terpene is gastric or it is not Dickensian or both is not correct then it is entrepreneurial.; sent9 -> int4: if the terpene is not an adverbial that it is gastric or it is not Dickensian or both is not true.; sent4 -> int5: if the missal is not ipsilateral then the fact that it... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the terpene is not entrepreneurial. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the missal is indirect and it does corrupt is wrong then the terpene is non-adverbial. sent2: the bascule does not swoop cosmetic and is not a kind of a kishke if it is a weekend. sent3: if the missal is not Dickensian then the bas... | sent5 & sent14 -> int1: the missal is not Dickensian.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the bascule is an adverbial but not Dickensian.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the missal is not gastric it is not Dickensian. | [
"the missal is not gastric.",
"if that the missal is not Dickensian is not incorrect the bascule is a kind of an adverbial but it is not Dickensian.",
"if the bascule is a kind of adverbial thing that is not Dickensian the terpene is not entrepreneurial."
] | [
"The missal is not Dickensian.",
"The missal is not Dickensian if it is not gastric.",
"It is not Dickensian if the missal is not gastric."
] | The missal is not Dickensian if it is not gastric. | if that the missal is not Dickensian is not incorrect the bascule is a kind of an adverbial but it is not Dickensian. |
the terpene is not entrepreneurial. | sent1: if the fact that the missal is indirect and it does corrupt is wrong then the terpene is non-adverbial. sent2: the bascule does not swoop cosmetic and is not a kind of a kishke if it is a weekend. sent3: if the missal is not Dickensian then the bascule is a kind of an adverbial. sent4: the fact that something is... | ¬{D}{c} | sent1: ¬({F}{a} & {E}{a}) -> ¬{C}{c} sent2: {K}{b} -> (¬{J}{b} & ¬{H}{b}) sent3: ¬{B}{a} -> {C}{b} sent4: (x): ¬{G}x -> ¬({F}x & {E}x) sent5: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬{B}{a} sent6: (x): ¬({E}x & {C}x) -> ¬{C}x sent7: (x): ¬{H}x -> ¬({G}x & {I}x) sent8: (x): ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) -> {D}x sent9: (x): ¬{C}x -> ¬({A}x v ¬{B}x) sent10: (Ex): ... | [
"sent5 & sent14 -> int1: the missal is not Dickensian.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the bascule is an adverbial but not Dickensian.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent5 & sent14 -> int1: ¬{B}{a}; sent16 & int1 -> int2: ({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}); sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 12 | 0 | 12 | the terpene is entrepreneurial. | {D}{c} | 10 | [
"sent8 -> int3: if the fact that the terpene is gastric or it is not Dickensian or both is not correct then it is entrepreneurial.; sent9 -> int4: if the terpene is not an adverbial that it is gastric or it is not Dickensian or both is not true.; sent4 -> int5: if the missal is not ipsilateral then the fact that it... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the terpene is not entrepreneurial. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the missal is indirect and it does corrupt is wrong then the terpene is non-adverbial. sent2: the bascule does not swoop cosmetic and is not a kind of a kishke if it is a weekend. sent3: if the missal is not Dickensian then the bas... | sent5 & sent14 -> int1: the missal is not Dickensian.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the bascule is an adverbial but not Dickensian.; sent11 & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the missal is not gastric it is not Dickensian. | [
"the missal is not gastric.",
"if that the missal is not Dickensian is not incorrect the bascule is a kind of an adverbial but it is not Dickensian.",
"if the bascule is a kind of adverbial thing that is not Dickensian the terpene is not entrepreneurial."
] | [
"The missal is not Dickensian.",
"The missal is not Dickensian if it is not gastric.",
"It is not Dickensian if the missal is not gastric."
] | It is not Dickensian if the missal is not gastric. | if the bascule is a kind of adverbial thing that is not Dickensian the terpene is not entrepreneurial. |
the swooping Taiwanese does not occur and the swooping Balsaminaceae occurs. | sent1: that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur. sent2: the unquietness occurs and/or the scallop occurs. sent3: if the internationalness does not occur then that the swooping Taiwanese does not occur and the swooping Balsaminaceae ha... | (¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: ¬{F} -> ({D} & {E}) sent2: ({GH} v {DA}) sent3: ¬{A} -> ¬(¬{C} & {D}) sent4: ¬({E} & ¬{B}) -> ¬{A} sent5: ¬{J} -> ({I} & ¬{H}) sent6: {B} -> ¬{C} sent7: ¬{JG} -> {IJ} sent8: ¬{F} sent9: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent10: {M} -> (¬{K} & ¬{L}) sent11: ¬{H} -> ({G} & {F}) sent12: {HT} sent13: {BI} sent14: ¬{IH} -> ({JC} &... | [
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: both the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidental happens.; int1 -> int2: the swooping Balsaminaceae occurs.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: ({D} & {E}); int1 -> int2: {D};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | the fact that not the swooping Taiwanese but the swooping Balsaminaceae happens is not right. | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | 11 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the swooping Taiwanese does not occur and the swooping Balsaminaceae occurs. ; $context$ = sent1: that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur. sent2: the unquietness occurs and/or the scallop occurs. sent3: if the internat... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur. | [
"the swooping Babesiidae does not occur."
] | [
"that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur."
] | that the swooping Balsaminaceae and the incidentalness happens is brought about by that the swooping Babesiidae does not occur. | the swooping Babesiidae does not occur. |
either the H-bomb is agonal or it does not abuse Phoeniculus or both. | sent1: if something is not elastic then the fact that that it is agonal and/or does not abuse Phoeniculus is not wrong is incorrect. sent2: the H-bomb is agonal and/or it does not abuse Phoeniculus if the everyman does abuse Phoeniculus. sent3: either the everyman abuses Phoeniculus or it is not agonal or both. sent4: ... | ({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) | sent1: (x): ¬{B}x -> ¬({C}x v ¬{A}x) sent2: {A}{a} -> ({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) sent3: ({A}{a} v ¬{C}{a}) sent4: {A}{a} -> ({C}{b} v {A}{b}) | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 3 | 0 | 3 | the fact that either the H-bomb is agonal or it does not abuse Phoeniculus or both is false. | ¬({C}{b} v ¬{A}{b}) | 4 | [
"sent1 -> int1: if the H-bomb is not an elastic that it is agonal or it does not abuse Phoeniculus or both does not hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = either the H-bomb is agonal or it does not abuse Phoeniculus or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not elastic then the fact that that it is agonal and/or does not abuse Phoeniculus is not wrong is incorrect. sent2: the H-bomb is agonal and/or it does not abuse Phoeniculus if the everyman does ab... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | either the everyman abuses Phoeniculus or it is not agonal or both. | [
"if the everyman abuses Phoeniculus then the H-bomb is not non-agonal and/or abuses Phoeniculus."
] | [
"either the everyman abuses Phoeniculus or it is not agonal or both."
] | either the everyman abuses Phoeniculus or it is not agonal or both. | if the everyman abuses Phoeniculus then the H-bomb is not non-agonal and/or abuses Phoeniculus. |
the getaway does not occur. | sent1: the pyrogallicness does not occur and the omission does not occur if the gelling bilocation does not occur. sent2: that the gelling bilocation does not occur is triggered by that the Malian but not the congregation occurs. sent3: the antitrade does not occur and the kneading does not occur. sent4: the virologica... | ¬{AB} | sent1: ¬{D} -> (¬{C} & ¬{B}) sent2: ({F} & ¬{E}) -> ¬{D} sent3: (¬{JH} & ¬{DU}) sent4: (¬{IC} & ¬{JG}) sent5: ¬{GJ} sent6: {BJ} -> (¬{HL} & ¬{EU}) sent7: (¬{IM} & ¬{IN}) sent8: (¬{AI} & ¬{FH}) sent9: (¬{FC} & ¬{DK}) sent10: ¬{DC} sent11: {B} -> (¬{FQ} & ¬{A}) sent12: {JC} sent13: {EE} -> (¬{IA} & ¬{AL}) sent14: (¬{C} &... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 14 | 0 | 14 | the getaway happens. | {AB} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the getaway does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the pyrogallicness does not occur and the omission does not occur if the gelling bilocation does not occur. sent2: that the gelling bilocation does not occur is triggered by that the Malian but not the congregation occurs. sent3: the antitrade does not occ... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the abusing validation occurs. | [
"the pyrogallicness does not occur and the omission does not occur if the gelling bilocation does not occur."
] | [
"the abusing validation occurs."
] | the abusing validation occurs. | the pyrogallicness does not occur and the omission does not occur if the gelling bilocation does not occur. |
the astrolabe is not a Pongo. | sent1: if something is not non-handmade but doctoral then it is not a Pongo. sent2: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten and is uncertain is wrong. sent3: the nuthatch does not abuse vent. sent4: the nuthatch tucks durance. sent5: that the astrolabe is uncertain thing that is a kind of a Pongo is incorrect. sent6: if some... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: (x): ({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬{G}{c} sent4: {L}{c} sent5: ¬({AB}{b} & {B}{b}) sent6: (x): ({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent7: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent8: ¬{F}{c} -> ({D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬({K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{J}x sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent11: (x):... | [
"sent10 & sent13 -> int1: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten but it is not uncertain does not hold.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent10 & sent13 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | the astrolabe is not a Pongo. | ¬{B}{b} | 8 | [
"sent1 -> int2: that the astrolabe is not a Pongo is not false if it is handmade and it is doctoral.; sent6 -> int3: if the nuthatch scrabbles Cardiff but it does not abuse vent it is not cross-sentential.; sent14 & sent4 -> int4: the nuthatch does scrabble Cardiff.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: the nuthatch does scrabble... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the astrolabe is not a Pongo. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not non-handmade but doctoral then it is not a Pongo. sent2: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten and is uncertain is wrong. sent3: the nuthatch does not abuse vent. sent4: the nuthatch tucks durance. sent5: that the astrolabe is uncertain t... | sent10 & sent13 -> int1: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten but it is not uncertain does not hold.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that that the isoagglutinin is wheaten thing that is not uncertain is incorrect is true if it is not doctoral. | [
"the isoagglutinin is not doctoral.",
"if that the isoagglutinin is both wheaten and not uncertain is false the astrolabe is a Pongo."
] | [
"If it is not a PhD, the fact that isoagglutinin is wheaten is incorrect.",
"The fact that the isoagglutinin is wheaten is incorrect if it is not a PhD."
] | If it is not a PhD, the fact that isoagglutinin is wheaten is incorrect. | the isoagglutinin is not doctoral. |
the astrolabe is not a Pongo. | sent1: if something is not non-handmade but doctoral then it is not a Pongo. sent2: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten and is uncertain is wrong. sent3: the nuthatch does not abuse vent. sent4: the nuthatch tucks durance. sent5: that the astrolabe is uncertain thing that is a kind of a Pongo is incorrect. sent6: if some... | ¬{B}{b} | sent1: (x): ({C}x & {A}x) -> ¬{B}x sent2: ¬({AA}{a} & {AB}{a}) sent3: ¬{G}{c} sent4: {L}{c} sent5: ¬({AB}{b} & {B}{b}) sent6: (x): ({H}x & ¬{G}x) -> ¬{F}x sent7: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) -> {B}{b} sent8: ¬{F}{c} -> ({D}{a} & ¬{E}{a}) sent9: (x): ¬({K}x & {J}x) -> ¬{J}x sent10: ¬{A}{a} -> ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}) sent11: (x):... | [
"sent10 & sent13 -> int1: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten but it is not uncertain does not hold.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent10 & sent13 -> int1: ¬({AA}{a} & ¬{AB}{a}); sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 11 | 0 | 11 | the astrolabe is not a Pongo. | ¬{B}{b} | 8 | [
"sent1 -> int2: that the astrolabe is not a Pongo is not false if it is handmade and it is doctoral.; sent6 -> int3: if the nuthatch scrabbles Cardiff but it does not abuse vent it is not cross-sentential.; sent14 & sent4 -> int4: the nuthatch does scrabble Cardiff.; int4 & sent3 -> int5: the nuthatch does scrabble... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the astrolabe is not a Pongo. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not non-handmade but doctoral then it is not a Pongo. sent2: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten and is uncertain is wrong. sent3: the nuthatch does not abuse vent. sent4: the nuthatch tucks durance. sent5: that the astrolabe is uncertain t... | sent10 & sent13 -> int1: that the isoagglutinin is wheaten but it is not uncertain does not hold.; sent7 & int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the fact that that the isoagglutinin is wheaten thing that is not uncertain is incorrect is true if it is not doctoral. | [
"the isoagglutinin is not doctoral.",
"if that the isoagglutinin is both wheaten and not uncertain is false the astrolabe is a Pongo."
] | [
"If it is not a PhD, the fact that isoagglutinin is wheaten is incorrect.",
"The fact that the isoagglutinin is wheaten is incorrect if it is not a PhD."
] | The fact that the isoagglutinin is wheaten is incorrect if it is not a PhD. | if that the isoagglutinin is both wheaten and not uncertain is false the astrolabe is a Pongo. |
the teasel is not a hydrolysate but it is a kind of a recombinant. | sent1: if that the teasel is not a inutility is true the fact that it is Afghani and is not a abvolt is false. sent2: that the flank is articulate thing that is a Benedictine is not false if it is not Erasmian. sent3: the flank is non-Erasmian. sent4: the fact that the fact that the brine is a kind of a maze but it is ... | (¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: ¬{CI}{a} -> ¬({EM}{a} & ¬{BO}{a}) sent2: ¬{M}{f} -> ({L}{f} & {H}{f}) sent3: ¬{M}{f} sent4: ¬{EJ}{iq} -> ¬({FH}{iq} & ¬{C}{iq}) sent5: ¬{A}{t} sent6: ¬{K}{g} sent7: ({BO}{a} & ¬{IM}{a}) sent8: ¬{EO}{de} -> ¬{CP}{de} sent9: ¬({A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> {A}{b} sent10: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent11: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬({... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the teasel is dispensable.; assump1 & sent13 -> int1: the teasel is dispensable but it is not a epigone.; sent11 & sent18 -> int2: the fact that the teasel is a kind of dispensable thing that is not a kind of a epigone is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assu... | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 & sent13 -> int1: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); sent11 & sent18 -> int2: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: ¬{A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | the fact that the teasel is not a hydrolysate but recombinant is wrong. | ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) | 11 | [
"sent2 & sent3 -> int5: the flank is a kind of articulate thing that is a Benedictine.; int5 -> int6: the flank is a Benedictine.; sent15 & int6 -> int7: the leech is non-mecopterous.; sent17 -> int8: that that the fact that the entrecote is a Montespan and is not the poise hold is not true if the entrecote is not ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the teasel is not a hydrolysate but it is a kind of a recombinant. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the teasel is not a inutility is true the fact that it is Afghani and is not a abvolt is false. sent2: that the flank is articulate thing that is a Benedictine is not false if it is not Erasmian. sent3: the fl... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the teasel is not a epigone. | [
"the fact that the teasel is dispensable but it is not a kind of a epigone does not hold if it is not a Didion.",
"that the teasel is not a Didion hold."
] | [
"The teasel isn't a epigone.",
"The teasel isn't an Epigone."
] | The teasel isn't a epigone. | the fact that the teasel is dispensable but it is not a kind of a epigone does not hold if it is not a Didion. |
the teasel is not a hydrolysate but it is a kind of a recombinant. | sent1: if that the teasel is not a inutility is true the fact that it is Afghani and is not a abvolt is false. sent2: that the flank is articulate thing that is a Benedictine is not false if it is not Erasmian. sent3: the flank is non-Erasmian. sent4: the fact that the fact that the brine is a kind of a maze but it is ... | (¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) | sent1: ¬{CI}{a} -> ¬({EM}{a} & ¬{BO}{a}) sent2: ¬{M}{f} -> ({L}{f} & {H}{f}) sent3: ¬{M}{f} sent4: ¬{EJ}{iq} -> ¬({FH}{iq} & ¬{C}{iq}) sent5: ¬{A}{t} sent6: ¬{K}{g} sent7: ({BO}{a} & ¬{IM}{a}) sent8: ¬{EO}{de} -> ¬{CP}{de} sent9: ¬({A}{c} & ¬{B}{c}) -> {A}{b} sent10: {A}{b} -> ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) sent11: ¬{E}{a} -> ¬({... | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the teasel is dispensable.; assump1 & sent13 -> int1: the teasel is dispensable but it is not a epigone.; sent11 & sent18 -> int2: the fact that the teasel is a kind of dispensable thing that is not a kind of a epigone is wrong.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assu... | UNKNOWN | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 & sent13 -> int1: ({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); sent11 & sent18 -> int2: ¬({A}{a} & ¬{B}{a}); int1 & int2 -> int3: #F#; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: ¬{A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 15 | 0 | 15 | the fact that the teasel is not a hydrolysate but recombinant is wrong. | ¬(¬{D}{a} & {C}{a}) | 11 | [
"sent2 & sent3 -> int5: the flank is a kind of articulate thing that is a Benedictine.; int5 -> int6: the flank is a Benedictine.; sent15 & int6 -> int7: the leech is non-mecopterous.; sent17 -> int8: that that the fact that the entrecote is a Montespan and is not the poise hold is not true if the entrecote is not ... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the teasel is not a hydrolysate but it is a kind of a recombinant. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the teasel is not a inutility is true the fact that it is Afghani and is not a abvolt is false. sent2: that the flank is articulate thing that is a Benedictine is not false if it is not Erasmian. sent3: the fl... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the teasel is not a epigone. | [
"the fact that the teasel is dispensable but it is not a kind of a epigone does not hold if it is not a Didion.",
"that the teasel is not a Didion hold."
] | [
"The teasel isn't a epigone.",
"The teasel isn't an Epigone."
] | The teasel isn't an Epigone. | that the teasel is not a Didion hold. |
that the azotemicness does not occur is not wrong. | sent1: if that the papillariness does not occur and the gelling yttrium happens does not hold then the gelling yttrium does not occur. sent2: if the annelidness occurs then the intermezzo and the non-baryticness occurs. sent3: if that both the extinguishableness and the azotemicness happens is not right the Christian d... | ¬{B} | sent1: ¬(¬{H} & {F}) -> ¬{F} sent2: {I} -> ({E} & ¬{G}) sent3: ¬({C} & {B}) -> ¬{A} sent4: ¬{P} -> ¬({L} & {O}) sent5: ¬{L} -> ¬(¬{H} & {F}) sent6: ¬({K} & {M}) -> ¬{K} sent7: ¬{A} -> ¬({DT} & ¬{EM}) sent8: ¬({L} & {O}) -> ¬{L} sent9: ({E} & ¬{F}) -> ¬{D} sent10: ¬{D} -> ¬({C} & {B}) sent11: ¬({AA} & ¬{AB}) sent12: ¬({... | [
"sent17 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | [
"sent17 & sent11 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 1 | 1 | 17 | 0 | 17 | the fact that the Land happens and the paper does not occur is false. | ¬({DT} & ¬{EM}) | 12 | [
"sent19 -> int1: the deflationariness does not occur.; sent16 & int1 -> int2: the fact that that both the cryocautery and the granulomatousness occurs is false is correct.; sent6 & int2 -> int3: the cryocautery does not occur.; sent14 & int3 -> int4: the annelidness happens and the Catalan happens.; int4 -> int5: t... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the azotemicness does not occur is not wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the papillariness does not occur and the gelling yttrium happens does not hold then the gelling yttrium does not occur. sent2: if the annelidness occurs then the intermezzo and the non-baryticness occurs. sent3: if that both ... | sent17 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if the fact that the chuck happens but the maternalness does not occur is false the azotemicness does not occur. | [
"the fact that both the chuck and the non-maternalness occurs is not correct."
] | [
"if the fact that the chuck happens but the maternalness does not occur is false the azotemicness does not occur."
] | if the fact that the chuck happens but the maternalness does not occur is false the azotemicness does not occur. | the fact that both the chuck and the non-maternalness occurs is not correct. |
the fact that the tsetse is not unactable and it does not scrabble consecration is incorrect. | sent1: if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration. sent2: the burrow is not non-clinker-built if there is something such that it is cybernetics and not tertian. sent3: if the haustorium is an ulcer then the mammy scrabbles consecration. s... | ¬(¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) | sent1: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {E}{c} sent2: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}{br} sent3: {D}{b} -> {E}{c} sent4: {E}{c} -> ¬({F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent5: ¬({H}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent6: (x): {D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}x sent8: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent10: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {E}{a... | [
"sent11 -> int1: the fact that the snuffle is tertian is not wrong.; sent9 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the haustorium is not an ulcer but it is cybernetics is not right.; sent1 & int2 -> int3: the mammy scrabbles consecration.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent11 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent9 & int1 -> int2: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}); sent1 & int2 -> int3: {E}{c};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | the burrow is clinker-built. | {A}{br} | 8 | [
"sent6 -> int4: if the snuffle is an ulcer it is cybernetics and it is not tertian.; sent7 -> int5: if that the haustorium is both not unfruitful and actable is wrong it is actable.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the haustorium is unactable.; int6 -> int7: something is unactable.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the tsetse is not unactable and it does not scrabble consecration is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration. sent2: the burrow is not non-clinker-built if there is something... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the snuffle is clinker-built and is tertian. | [
"that the haustorium is not an ulcer and is cybernetics is not correct if the snuffle is tertian.",
"if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration."
] | [
"The snuffle is made of tertian material.",
"The snuffle is made of tertian."
] | The snuffle is made of tertian material. | that the haustorium is not an ulcer and is cybernetics is not correct if the snuffle is tertian. |
the fact that the tsetse is not unactable and it does not scrabble consecration is incorrect. | sent1: if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration. sent2: the burrow is not non-clinker-built if there is something such that it is cybernetics and not tertian. sent3: if the haustorium is an ulcer then the mammy scrabbles consecration. s... | ¬(¬{F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) | sent1: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) -> {E}{c} sent2: (x): ({C}x & ¬{B}x) -> {A}{br} sent3: {D}{b} -> {E}{c} sent4: {E}{c} -> ¬({F}{d} & ¬{E}{d}) sent5: ¬({H}{b} & ¬{F}{b}) sent6: (x): {D}x -> ({C}x & ¬{B}x) sent7: (x): ¬({H}x & ¬{F}x) -> {F}x sent8: {C}{a} -> {B}{b} sent9: {B}{a} -> ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}) sent10: ¬(¬{A}{a} & {E}{a... | [
"sent11 -> int1: the fact that the snuffle is tertian is not wrong.; sent9 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the haustorium is not an ulcer but it is cybernetics is not right.; sent1 & int2 -> int3: the mammy scrabbles consecration.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent11 -> int1: {B}{a}; sent9 & int1 -> int2: ¬(¬{D}{b} & {C}{b}); sent1 & int2 -> int3: {E}{c};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | the burrow is clinker-built. | {A}{br} | 8 | [
"sent6 -> int4: if the snuffle is an ulcer it is cybernetics and it is not tertian.; sent7 -> int5: if that the haustorium is both not unfruitful and actable is wrong it is actable.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the haustorium is unactable.; int6 -> int7: something is unactable.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the fact that the tsetse is not unactable and it does not scrabble consecration is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration. sent2: the burrow is not non-clinker-built if there is something... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the snuffle is clinker-built and is tertian. | [
"that the haustorium is not an ulcer and is cybernetics is not correct if the snuffle is tertian.",
"if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration."
] | [
"The snuffle is made of tertian material.",
"The snuffle is made of tertian."
] | The snuffle is made of tertian. | if the fact that the haustorium is both not an ulcer and cybernetics does not hold then the mammy does scrabble consecration. |
that the leech does tailor and is not a Gadsden is incorrect. | sent1: that the mirasol is not purposeless is not incorrect. sent2: if the mirasol is non-purposeless the leech is not a bones and it does not intertwine. sent3: there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it does not untie is not right. sent4: there exists something such that the fact that it is geo... | ¬({C}{b} & ¬{B}{b}) | sent1: ¬{F}{c} sent2: ¬{F}{c} -> (¬{E}{b} & ¬{D}{b}) sent3: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬({AA}x & ¬{AB}x) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & ¬{AB}x) -> ¬{A}{a} sent6: {F}{b} -> ¬({G}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) sent7: ({F}{b} & {H}{b}) sent8: ¬({G}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {E}{a} sent9: (x): {B}x -> ¬({BO}x & ¬{A}x) sent10: (x): (¬{E}x & ¬{D}... | [
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: the aril is not offstage.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent3 & sent5 -> int1: ¬{A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | the fact that the truant is a rutabaga and not offstage does not hold. | ¬({BO}{ie} & ¬{A}{ie}) | 8 | [
"sent9 -> int2: that the fact that the truant is a rutabaga but it is not offstage is correct is false if it is a Gadsden.; sent12 -> int3: if the aril is a kind of a bones it does not intertwine and it does tailor.; sent7 -> int4: the fact that the leech is purposeless is not false.; sent6 & int4 -> int5: that the... | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that the leech does tailor and is not a Gadsden is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: that the mirasol is not purposeless is not incorrect. sent2: if the mirasol is non-purposeless the leech is not a bones and it does not intertwine. sent3: there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it d... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it does not untie is not right. | [
"if there is something such that that it is a kind of non-geomorphologic thing that does not untie does not hold the aril is not offstage."
] | [
"there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it does not untie is not right."
] | there is something such that that it is not geomorphologic and it does not untie is not right. | if there is something such that that it is a kind of non-geomorphologic thing that does not untie does not hold the aril is not offstage. |
the shrubbery is not a beet if it abuses differential. | sent1: something is not a kind of a beet if it does abuse differential and it is symmetrical. sent2: the shrubbery is not a cephaloglycin if it does descant and it abuses differential. sent3: the hookup abuses differential. sent4: the shrubbery is symmetrical. sent5: something does abuse differential if the fact that i... | {A}{a} -> ¬{C}{a} | sent1: (x): ({A}x & {B}x) -> ¬{C}x sent2: ({M}{a} & {A}{a}) -> ¬{DH}{a} sent3: {A}{hk} sent4: {B}{a} sent5: (x): {B}x -> {A}x | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shrubbery does abuse differential.; assump1 & sent4 -> int1: the shrubbery abuses differential and is symmetrical.; sent1 -> int2: that if the shrubbery does abuse differential and it is symmetrical the shrubbery is not a beet is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the shrubbery is ... | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: {A}{a}; assump1 & sent4 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); sent1 -> int2: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}) -> ¬{C}{a}; int1 & int2 -> int3: ¬{C}{a}; [assump1] & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 3 | 0 | 3 | the differential does abuse differential. | {A}{b} | 5 | [
"sent5 -> int4: the fact that the differential abuses differential if the differential is symmetrical hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the shrubbery is not a beet if it abuses differential. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a kind of a beet if it does abuse differential and it is symmetrical. sent2: the shrubbery is not a cephaloglycin if it does descant and it abuses differential. sent3: the hookup abuses differential. sent4: the s... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shrubbery does abuse differential.; assump1 & sent4 -> int1: the shrubbery abuses differential and is symmetrical.; sent1 -> int2: that if the shrubbery does abuse differential and it is symmetrical the shrubbery is not a beet is right.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the shrubbery is not a... | DeductionInstance | the shrubbery is symmetrical. | [
"something is not a kind of a beet if it does abuse differential and it is symmetrical."
] | [
"the shrubbery is symmetrical."
] | the shrubbery is symmetrical. | something is not a kind of a beet if it does abuse differential and it is symmetrical. |
there is something such that it is a kind of a rebroadcast that does jell Shema. | sent1: the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner. sent2: the chiropractor is a kind of a rebroadcast if it is a soda and is a pressmark. sent3: the fact that the paloverde is a kind of a rebroadcast is right. sent4: the chiropractor is a kind of a rebroadcast if it is a soda but not a pr... | (Ex): ({C}x & {B}x) | sent1: ¬{A}{a} -> {B}{b} sent2: ({D}{b} & {E}{b}) -> {C}{b} sent3: {C}{a} sent4: ({D}{b} & ¬{E}{b}) -> {C}{b} sent5: {A}{c} -> {A}{a} sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent7: ¬{AA}{aa} sent8: ¬{A}{a} | [
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: the fact that the chiropractor does jell Shema hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent1 & sent8 -> int1: {B}{b};"
] | UNKNOWN | 3 | null | 5 | 0 | 5 | the chiropractor does not abuse Faulkner. | ¬{A}{b} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = there is something such that it is a kind of a rebroadcast that does jell Shema. ; $context$ = sent1: the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner. sent2: the chiropractor is a kind of a rebroadcast if it is a soda and is a pressmark. sent3: the fact that the paloverde is a k... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner. | [
"the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner."
] | [
"the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner."
] | the chiropractor does jell Shema if the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner. | the paloverde does not abuse Faulkner. |
the Uighur is a kind of a compound. | sent1: if the fact that the firedamp does not jell farce and is a fundamentalist does not hold then the philatelist is a pollster. sent2: that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect. sent3: if the yttrium is not rhythmical then the Uighur is compound. sent4: if the yttrium does jell... | {F}{d} | sent1: ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) -> {D}{b} sent2: ¬(¬{L}{e} & ¬{K}{e}) sent3: {E}{c} -> {F}{d} sent4: {K}{c} -> {J}{c} sent5: ({E}{b} & ¬{C}{b}) -> ¬{C}{a} sent6: (x): ¬(¬{L}x & ¬{K}x) -> {K}{c} sent7: ¬{C}{a} -> ¬(¬{A}{d} & {B}{d}) sent8: (x): {A}x -> ¬(¬{B}{a} & {C}{a}) sent9: (x): (¬{G}x & ¬{D}x) -> {E}{b} sent10: (x): ¬(... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 9 | 0 | 9 | there exists something such that it is a Istanbul. | (Ex): {AJ}x | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the Uighur is a kind of a compound. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the firedamp does not jell farce and is a fundamentalist does not hold then the philatelist is a pollster. sent2: that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect. sent3: if the yttrium is not rhythm... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect. | [
"the yttrium is unrhythmical if the philatelist is a kind of a pollster."
] | [
"that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect."
] | that the mum does not jell Basque and it does not jell proboscidean is incorrect. | the yttrium is unrhythmical if the philatelist is a kind of a pollster. |
the presidentialness happens. | sent1: that both the scrabbling postilion and the non-caulescentness happens is incorrect. sent2: the rhinoscopy does not occur. sent3: that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy happens and the rhinoscopy occurs is incorrect. sent4: the presidentialness does not occur if the rhinoscopy but not the scrabbling hysterocataleps... | {C} | sent1: ¬({EA} & ¬{HR}) sent2: ¬{B} sent3: ¬({A} & {B}) sent4: ({B} & ¬{A}) -> ¬{C} sent5: {B} -> {C} sent6: ¬({FD} & ¬{GM}) sent7: ¬{A} sent8: ({A} & {B}) -> ¬{IQ} sent9: ¬({A} & ¬{B}) -> {C} sent10: {D} -> ({B} & ¬{A}) sent11: ¬(¬{E} & ¬{D}) -> ¬{C} sent12: {CD} | [
"void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy but not the rhinoscopy occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy happens.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy but not the rhinoscopy occurs is not tr... | PROVED | [
"void -> assump1: ({A} & ¬{B}); assump1 -> int1: {A}; int1 & sent7 -> int2: #F#; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: ¬({A} & ¬{B}); sent9 & int3 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | 3 | 3 | 10 | 0 | 10 | the presidentialness does not occur. | ¬{C} | 7 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the presidentialness happens. ; $context$ = sent1: that both the scrabbling postilion and the non-caulescentness happens is incorrect. sent2: the rhinoscopy does not occur. sent3: that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy happens and the rhinoscopy occurs is incorrect. sent4: the presidentialness does not occ... | void -> assump1: Let's assume that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy but not the rhinoscopy occurs.; assump1 -> int1: the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy happens.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the fact that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy but not the rhinoscopy occurs is not true.; ... | DeductionInstance | the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy does not occur. | [
"that the presidentialness happens is correct if that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy occurs and the rhinoscopy does not occur is false."
] | [
"the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy does not occur."
] | the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy does not occur. | that the presidentialness happens is correct if that the scrabbling hysterocatalepsy occurs and the rhinoscopy does not occur is false. |
there exists something such that if that either it does jell shirtwaist or it is lithomantic or both is not correct then it is not a desire. | sent1: if the fact that something does jell braid and/or is a Syzygium does not hold it is a decidua. sent2: if that something does jell shirtwaist and/or it is lithomantic is incorrect then it does desire. sent3: if that the Mojave is a Dowland and/or does jell shirtwaist is not right it is not a cytokine. sent4: some... | (Ex): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x | sent1: (x): ¬({ES}x v {O}x) -> {BA}x sent2: (x): ¬({AA}x v {AB}x) -> {B}x sent3: ¬({BB}{fi} v {AA}{fi}) -> ¬{DI}{fi} sent4: (x): ¬({IB}x v {BR}x) -> ¬{CK}x sent5: ¬({AA}{aa} v {AB}{aa}) -> {B}{aa} sent6: (Ex): ({AA}x v {AB}x) -> ¬{B}x sent7: (Ex): ¬({C}x v {FS}x) -> ¬{G}x sent8: (Ex): ¬({DP}x v {DE}x) -> ¬{HB}x sent9: ... | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 10 | 0 | 10 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if that either it does jell shirtwaist or it is lithomantic or both is not correct then it is not a desire. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that something does jell braid and/or is a Syzygium does not hold it is a decidua. sent2: if that something does jell shirtwaist an... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that if that either it tucks Sterope or it is a statics or both does not hold then it is not a dowse. | [
"there exists something such that if it does jell shirtwaist or it is lithomantic or both then the fact that it is not a desire is true."
] | [
"there exists something such that if that either it tucks Sterope or it is a statics or both does not hold then it is not a dowse."
] | there exists something such that if that either it tucks Sterope or it is a statics or both does not hold then it is not a dowse. | there exists something such that if it does jell shirtwaist or it is lithomantic or both then the fact that it is not a desire is true. |
the thecodont does not abuse Lancashire but it does jell vise. | sent1: there is something such that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningless. sent2: if something gels vise that it is not a Titanosauridae and does abuse Lancashire is not true. sent3: that the belly abuses Lancashire is true if there exists something such that the fact that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningl... | (¬{A}{b} & {C}{b}) | sent1: (Ex): (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent2: (x): {C}x -> ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) sent3: (x): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) -> {A}{a} sent4: (Ex): ¬({A}x & {C}x) sent5: (x): ¬(¬{B}x & {A}x) -> ¬{A}x sent6: {A}{a} -> ¬{A}{b} sent7: (Ex): ¬(¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: ¬({B}{c} v ¬{E}{c}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: (x): ¬({F}x & {D}x) -> ¬{D}x sent10: (x): {G}x -... | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the belly does abuse Lancashire.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent7 & sent3 -> int1: {A}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 18 | 0 | 18 | there exists something such that the fact that it does not abuse Schleiden and it does abuse brass is wrong. | (Ex): ¬(¬{ES}x & {FQ}x) | 8 | [
"sent5 -> int2: if that the thecodont is not a Titanosauridae but it does abuse Lancashire does not hold it does not abuse Lancashire.; sent2 -> int3: if the thecodont does jell vise then the fact that it is not a Titanosauridae and abuses Lancashire does not hold.;"
] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = the thecodont does not abuse Lancashire but it does jell vise. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningless. sent2: if something gels vise that it is not a Titanosauridae and does abuse Lancashire is not true. sent3: that the belly abuses Lancashire is tru... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | there exists something such that that it is both not hydrostatic and meaningless is not correct. | [
"that the belly abuses Lancashire is true if there exists something such that the fact that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningless does not hold."
] | [
"there exists something such that that it is both not hydrostatic and meaningless is not correct."
] | there exists something such that that it is both not hydrostatic and meaningless is not correct. | that the belly abuses Lancashire is true if there exists something such that the fact that it is not hydrostatic and it is meaningless does not hold. |
the mamoncillo is a concourse and it does abuse sackcloth. | sent1: the mamoncillo does abuse sackcloth. sent2: the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. sent3: The sackcloth does abuse mamoncillo. sent4: the shoebill is long-distance. sent5: the shoebill is a falsehood and/or it is a Epirus. sent6: if the mamoncillo is not long-distance t... | ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) | sent1: {D}{b} sent2: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: {AC}{aa} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent6: ¬{A}{b} -> {D}{a} sent7: ({C}{bf} v ¬{HP}{bf}) -> ¬{IG}{bf} sent8: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} sent10: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the shoebill is a falsehood and/or it is not a Epirus.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the shoebill is not a ukase.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬{B}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the mamoncillo is a concourse and it does abuse sackcloth. ; $context$ = sent1: the mamoncillo does abuse sackcloth. sent2: the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. sent3: The sackcloth does abuse mamoncillo. sent4: the shoebill is long-distance. sent5: the shoebi... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. | [
"the shoebill is long-distance.",
"if the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both then it is not a ukase."
] | [
"The shoebill is a lie if it is long-distance.",
"If it is long-distance, the shoebill is a lie."
] | The shoebill is a lie if it is long-distance. | the shoebill is long-distance. |
the mamoncillo is a concourse and it does abuse sackcloth. | sent1: the mamoncillo does abuse sackcloth. sent2: the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. sent3: The sackcloth does abuse mamoncillo. sent4: the shoebill is long-distance. sent5: the shoebill is a falsehood and/or it is a Epirus. sent6: if the mamoncillo is not long-distance t... | ({C}{b} & {D}{b}) | sent1: {D}{b} sent2: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) sent3: {AC}{aa} sent4: {A}{a} sent5: ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) sent6: ¬{A}{b} -> {D}{a} sent7: ({C}{bf} v ¬{HP}{bf}) -> ¬{IG}{bf} sent8: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}) -> ¬{B}{a} sent9: ¬{AB}{a} -> ¬{D}{a} sent10: {A}{a} -> ({AA}{a} v {AB}{a}) | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: the shoebill is a falsehood and/or it is not a Epirus.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the shoebill is not a ukase.;"
] | UNKNOWN | [
"sent2 & sent4 -> int1: ({AA}{a} v ¬{AB}{a}); int1 & sent8 -> int2: ¬{B}{a};"
] | UNKNOWN | 4 | null | 6 | 0 | 6 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = the mamoncillo is a concourse and it does abuse sackcloth. ; $context$ = sent1: the mamoncillo does abuse sackcloth. sent2: the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. sent3: The sackcloth does abuse mamoncillo. sent4: the shoebill is long-distance. sent5: the shoebi... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both if it is long-distance. | [
"the shoebill is long-distance.",
"if the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both then it is not a ukase."
] | [
"The shoebill is a lie if it is long-distance.",
"If it is long-distance, the shoebill is a lie."
] | If it is long-distance, the shoebill is a lie. | if the shoebill is a falsehood or it is not a Epirus or both then it is not a ukase. |
there exists something such that if it does not abuse stripe then it does jell hysterocatalepsy and tucks narthex. | sent1: something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct. sent2: something is dorsal and it is a Cyprinodontidae if the fact that it is non-arsenious is not incorrect. sent3: there is something such that if it is not a serology then it is a strophe and discontinues. sent... | (Ex): ¬{A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) | sent1: (x): ¬{CQ}x -> ({HG}x & {CN}x) sent2: (x): ¬{AR}x -> ({BK}x & {AJ}x) sent3: (Ex): ¬{HU}x -> ({BJ}x & {CE}x) sent4: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AA}x sent5: (x): ¬{BT}x -> ({JJ}x & {K}x) sent6: ¬{A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent7: (x): {A}x -> ({AA}x & {AB}x) sent8: (Ex): ¬{A}x -> {AB}x | [] | UNKNOWN | [] | UNKNOWN | 2 | null | 8 | 0 | 8 | there exists something such that if it is not arsenious then it is both dorsal and a Cyprinodontidae. | (Ex): ¬{AR}x -> ({BK}x & {AJ}x) | 2 | [
"sent2 -> int1: the flannelbush is dorsal and it is a kind of a Cyprinodontidae if it is not arsenious.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | PROVED | PROVED | $hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not abuse stripe then it does jell hysterocatalepsy and tucks narthex. ; $context$ = sent1: something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct. sent2: something is dorsal and it is a Cyprinodontidae if the fact th... | __UNKNOWN__ | DeductionInstance | something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct. | [
"there is something such that if it is not a serology then it is a strophe and discontinues."
] | [
"something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct."
] | something does scrabble multiple and it is a ritual if the fact that it does not direct is correct. | there is something such that if it is not a serology then it is a strophe and discontinues. |
that there are proconsular and forgetful things is wrong. | sent1: something is a pug and it is elementary. sent2: there is something such that it is a Reich. sent3: the burner is forgetful. sent4: the burner is a Reich. sent5: the burner abuses conductress. sent6: the conductress is forgetful. sent7: the cleaver is forgetful. sent8: there exists something such that it does hee... | ¬((Ex): ({A}x & {B}x)) | sent1: (Ex): ({EH}x & {FR}x) sent2: (Ex): {DR}x sent3: {B}{a} sent4: {DR}{a} sent5: {IE}{a} sent6: {B}{hp} sent7: {B}{fk} sent8: (Ex): {G}x sent9: {A}{a} sent10: (Ex): ({GK}x & {BA}x) sent11: (Ex): {IG}x sent12: {M}{a} sent13: (Ex): ({GK}x & {BQ}x) sent14: (Ex): {DG}x | [
"sent9 & sent3 -> int1: the burner is both not non-proconsular and not non-forgetful.; int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent9 & sent3 -> int1: ({A}{a} & {B}{a}); int1 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 12 | 0 | 12 | there is something such that it is a Reich and does abuse frontispiece. | (Ex): ({DR}x & {EO}x) | 6 | [] | UNKNOWN | UNKNOWN | $hypothesis$ = that there are proconsular and forgetful things is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: something is a pug and it is elementary. sent2: there is something such that it is a Reich. sent3: the burner is forgetful. sent4: the burner is a Reich. sent5: the burner abuses conductress. sent6: the conductress is forgetfu... | sent9 & sent3 -> int1: the burner is both not non-proconsular and not non-forgetful.; int1 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the burner is proconsular. | [
"the burner is forgetful."
] | [
"the burner is proconsular."
] | the burner is proconsular. | the burner is forgetful. |
that not the reorganizing but the waxing occurs is not right. | sent1: the binary happens. sent2: that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. sent3: the hemiparasiticness occurs. sent4: the fact that the Bruneianness happens is right. sent5: if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur. sent6:... | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: {F} sent2: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent3: {A} sent4: {CO} sent5: {F} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent6: ¬{E} sent7: ({CU} v {GT}) sent8: ¬{GO} | [
"sent3 -> int1: either the hemiparasiticness occurs or the rendering occurs or both.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the reorganizing does not occur.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the waxing occurs but the dash does not occur.; int3 -> int4: that the waxing occurs is right.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); int1 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: ({D} & ¬{E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that not the reorganizing but the waxing occurs is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the binary happens. sent2: that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. sent3: the hemiparasiticness occurs. sent4: the fact that the Bruneianness happens is right. sent5:... | sent3 -> int1: either the hemiparasiticness occurs or the rendering occurs or both.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the reorganizing does not occur.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the waxing occurs but the dash does not occur.; int3 -> int4: that the waxing occurs is right.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the hemiparasiticness occurs. | [
"that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs.",
"if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur.",
"the binary happens."
] | [
"The hemiparasiticness occurs.",
"The hemiparasiticness happens.",
"There is hemiparasiticness."
] | The hemiparasiticness occurs. | that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. |
that not the reorganizing but the waxing occurs is not right. | sent1: the binary happens. sent2: that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. sent3: the hemiparasiticness occurs. sent4: the fact that the Bruneianness happens is right. sent5: if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur. sent6:... | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: {F} sent2: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent3: {A} sent4: {CO} sent5: {F} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent6: ¬{E} sent7: ({CU} v {GT}) sent8: ¬{GO} | [
"sent3 -> int1: either the hemiparasiticness occurs or the rendering occurs or both.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the reorganizing does not occur.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the waxing occurs but the dash does not occur.; int3 -> int4: that the waxing occurs is right.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); int1 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: ({D} & ¬{E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that not the reorganizing but the waxing occurs is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the binary happens. sent2: that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. sent3: the hemiparasiticness occurs. sent4: the fact that the Bruneianness happens is right. sent5:... | sent3 -> int1: either the hemiparasiticness occurs or the rendering occurs or both.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the reorganizing does not occur.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the waxing occurs but the dash does not occur.; int3 -> int4: that the waxing occurs is right.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the hemiparasiticness occurs. | [
"that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs.",
"if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur.",
"the binary happens."
] | [
"The hemiparasiticness occurs.",
"The hemiparasiticness happens.",
"There is hemiparasiticness."
] | The hemiparasiticness happens. | if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur. |
that not the reorganizing but the waxing occurs is not right. | sent1: the binary happens. sent2: that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. sent3: the hemiparasiticness occurs. sent4: the fact that the Bruneianness happens is right. sent5: if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur. sent6:... | ¬(¬{C} & {D}) | sent1: {F} sent2: ({A} v {B}) -> ¬{C} sent3: {A} sent4: {CO} sent5: {F} -> ({D} & ¬{E}) sent6: ¬{E} sent7: ({CU} v {GT}) sent8: ¬{GO} | [
"sent3 -> int1: either the hemiparasiticness occurs or the rendering occurs or both.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the reorganizing does not occur.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the waxing occurs but the dash does not occur.; int3 -> int4: that the waxing occurs is right.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent3 -> int1: ({A} v {B}); int1 & sent2 -> int2: ¬{C}; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: ({D} & ¬{E}); int3 -> int4: {D}; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 3 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that not the reorganizing but the waxing occurs is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: the binary happens. sent2: that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs. sent3: the hemiparasiticness occurs. sent4: the fact that the Bruneianness happens is right. sent5:... | sent3 -> int1: either the hemiparasiticness occurs or the rendering occurs or both.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the reorganizing does not occur.; sent5 & sent1 -> int3: the waxing occurs but the dash does not occur.; int3 -> int4: that the waxing occurs is right.; int2 & int4 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | the hemiparasiticness occurs. | [
"that the reorganizing does not occur hold if the hemiparasiticness and/or the rendering occurs.",
"if that the binary occurs is correct the waxing occurs and the dash does not occur.",
"the binary happens."
] | [
"The hemiparasiticness occurs.",
"The hemiparasiticness happens.",
"There is hemiparasiticness."
] | There is hemiparasiticness. | the binary happens. |
that the oleaster is not a salp but it whips does not hold. | sent1: the oleaster is a whip if it is unobtrusive. sent2: if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. sent3: the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. sent4: if something is unobtrusive then it is not a salp and is a whip. sent5: either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizi... | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | sent1: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent2: {B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent3: {C}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent4: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: ({C}{aa} v {B}{aa}) | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the oleaster is unobtrusive then it is both not a salp and a whip.; sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the oleaster is unobtrusive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the oleaster is not a salp but it whips does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the oleaster is a whip if it is unobtrusive. sent2: if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. sent3: the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. sent4: if something is unobtrusive th... | sent4 -> int1: if the oleaster is unobtrusive then it is both not a salp and a whip.; sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the oleaster is unobtrusive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if something is unobtrusive then it is not a salp and is a whip. | [
"either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizidae or both.",
"the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure.",
"if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false."
] | [
"If something is not obvious then it is not a salp.",
"If something is not obvious then it is not a salp and is a whip.",
"If something is not noticeable then it is not a salp and is a whip."
] | If something is not obvious then it is not a salp. | either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizidae or both. |
that the oleaster is not a salp but it whips does not hold. | sent1: the oleaster is a whip if it is unobtrusive. sent2: if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. sent3: the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. sent4: if something is unobtrusive then it is not a salp and is a whip. sent5: either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizi... | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | sent1: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent2: {B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent3: {C}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent4: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: ({C}{aa} v {B}{aa}) | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the oleaster is unobtrusive then it is both not a salp and a whip.; sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the oleaster is unobtrusive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the oleaster is not a salp but it whips does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the oleaster is a whip if it is unobtrusive. sent2: if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. sent3: the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. sent4: if something is unobtrusive th... | sent4 -> int1: if the oleaster is unobtrusive then it is both not a salp and a whip.; sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the oleaster is unobtrusive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if something is unobtrusive then it is not a salp and is a whip. | [
"either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizidae or both.",
"the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure.",
"if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false."
] | [
"If something is not obvious then it is not a salp.",
"If something is not obvious then it is not a salp and is a whip.",
"If something is not noticeable then it is not a salp and is a whip."
] | If something is not obvious then it is not a salp and is a whip. | the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. |
that the oleaster is not a salp but it whips does not hold. | sent1: the oleaster is a whip if it is unobtrusive. sent2: if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. sent3: the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. sent4: if something is unobtrusive then it is not a salp and is a whip. sent5: either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizi... | ¬(¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}) | sent1: {A}{aa} -> {AB}{aa} sent2: {B}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent3: {C}{aa} -> {A}{aa} sent4: (x): {A}x -> (¬{AA}x & {AB}x) sent5: ({C}{aa} v {B}{aa}) | [
"sent4 -> int1: if the oleaster is unobtrusive then it is both not a salp and a whip.; sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the oleaster is unobtrusive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | [
"sent4 -> int1: {A}{aa} -> (¬{AA}{aa} & {AB}{aa}); sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: {A}{aa}; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis;"
] | DISPROVED | 2 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | null | null | null | [] | null | null | $hypothesis$ = that the oleaster is not a salp but it whips does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the oleaster is a whip if it is unobtrusive. sent2: if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. sent3: the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure. sent4: if something is unobtrusive th... | sent4 -> int1: if the oleaster is unobtrusive then it is both not a salp and a whip.; sent5 & sent3 & sent2 -> int2: the oleaster is unobtrusive.; int1 & int2 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__ | DeductionInstance | if something is unobtrusive then it is not a salp and is a whip. | [
"either the oleaster is sure or it is a Emberizidae or both.",
"the oleaster is unobtrusive if it is sure.",
"if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false."
] | [
"If something is not obvious then it is not a salp.",
"If something is not obvious then it is not a salp and is a whip.",
"If something is not noticeable then it is not a salp and is a whip."
] | If something is not noticeable then it is not a salp and is a whip. | if the oleaster is a kind of a Emberizidae then that it is unobtrusive is not false. |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.