there is something such that if it is upstream that it is nonunion and it is not Egyptian is incorrect.
sent1: the raft is nonunion but it is not a Egyptian if it is upstream. sent2: that the toggle is isothermic but it is not a Egyptian is incorrect if the fact that it is abdominovesical is right. sent3: the fact that the raft is nonunion but it is not a Egyptian is wrong if it is upstream. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that that it is not upstream is not false is not true the fact that it is a kind of nonunion thing that is a Egyptian is not right. sent5: there exists something such that if it is upstream then it is nonunion and is not a Egyptian. sent6: the fact that the groundsman is a gobble and non-upstream does not hold if it does configure azathioprine. sent7: there is something such that if it is shambolic then the fact that it is extracellular and it is not a kind of an animation is incorrect. sent8: the fact that the raft is nonunion thing that is Egyptian is incorrect if it is upstream. sent9: there exists something such that if the fact that it corsets Rostov is not false then that it logrolls and it does not disunify enterokinase does not hold. sent10: the fact that something is a Egyptian but not a Lama is not correct if it is a kind of a van. sent11: if the fact that the raft is sure is true the fact that it is dramatics and it is not a kind of a Egyptian is wrong. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Mormons the fact that it is a rightness and it does not disunify sternpost is false. sent13: if the raft is an inexperience then the fact that it does disunify dextrin and is not upstream is not correct. sent14: if the raft is upstream that it is a clean and it is not a reshuffle is incorrect. sent15: that the halophile disunifies piracy but it is not exculpatory does not hold if it is auspicious.
sent3 -> hypothesis;
if the dimwit is a kind of a van that it is Egyptian and it is not a Lama is wrong.
sent10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is upstream that it is nonunion and it is not Egyptian is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the raft is nonunion but it is not a Egyptian if it is upstream. sent2: that the toggle is isothermic but it is not a Egyptian is incorrect if the fact that it is abdominovesical is right. sent3: the fact that the raft is nonunion but it is not a Egyptian is wrong if it is upstream. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that that it is not upstream is not false is not true the fact that it is a kind of nonunion thing that is a Egyptian is not right. sent5: there exists something such that if it is upstream then it is nonunion and is not a Egyptian. sent6: the fact that the groundsman is a gobble and non-upstream does not hold if it does configure azathioprine. sent7: there is something such that if it is shambolic then the fact that it is extracellular and it is not a kind of an animation is incorrect. sent8: the fact that the raft is nonunion thing that is Egyptian is incorrect if it is upstream. sent9: there exists something such that if the fact that it corsets Rostov is not false then that it logrolls and it does not disunify enterokinase does not hold. sent10: the fact that something is a Egyptian but not a Lama is not correct if it is a kind of a van. sent11: if the fact that the raft is sure is true the fact that it is dramatics and it is not a kind of a Egyptian is wrong. sent12: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a Mormons the fact that it is a rightness and it does not disunify sternpost is false. sent13: if the raft is an inexperience then the fact that it does disunify dextrin and is not upstream is not correct. sent14: if the raft is upstream that it is a clean and it is not a reshuffle is incorrect. sent15: that the halophile disunifies piracy but it is not exculpatory does not hold if it is auspicious. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__