the fact that the involucrateness occurs is right.
sent1: the blazing does not occur. sent2: the reigning jerkin happens. sent3: the argenticness does not occur if the providentialness does not occur. sent4: if both the non-argenticness and the defense occurs the stridulation does not occur. sent5: the adrenocorticalness occurs. sent6: if the slipperiness does not occur then both the defense and the reigning jerkin happens. sent7: the involucrateness does not occur if the stridulation does not occur. sent8: the algometricness and the landslide occurs. sent9: if the providentialness occurs and the adrenocorticalness occurs then the walkover does not occur. sent10: the slipperiness does not occur. sent11: if the algometricness occurs then the walkover occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the providentialness occurs.; assump1 & sent5 -> int1: the providentialness occurs and the adrenocorticalness happens.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the walkover does not occur.; sent8 -> int3: the algometricness happens.; sent11 & int3 -> int4: the walkover happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the providentialness does not occur.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the argenticness does not occur.; sent6 & sent10 -> int8: the defense happens and the reigning jerkin occurs.; int8 -> int9: the defense happens.; int7 & int9 -> int10: both the non-argenticness and the defense occurs.; int10 & sent4 -> int11: the stridulation does not occur.; int11 & sent7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the involucrateness occurs is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the blazing does not occur. sent2: the reigning jerkin happens. sent3: the argenticness does not occur if the providentialness does not occur. sent4: if both the non-argenticness and the defense occurs the stridulation does not occur. sent5: the adrenocorticalness occurs. sent6: if the slipperiness does not occur then both the defense and the reigning jerkin happens. sent7: the involucrateness does not occur if the stridulation does not occur. sent8: the algometricness and the landslide occurs. sent9: if the providentialness occurs and the adrenocorticalness occurs then the walkover does not occur. sent10: the slipperiness does not occur. sent11: if the algometricness occurs then the walkover occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the providentialness occurs.; assump1 & sent5 -> int1: the providentialness occurs and the adrenocorticalness happens.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: the walkover does not occur.; sent8 -> int3: the algometricness happens.; sent11 & int3 -> int4: the walkover happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the providentialness does not occur.; int6 & sent3 -> int7: the argenticness does not occur.; sent6 & sent10 -> int8: the defense happens and the reigning jerkin occurs.; int8 -> int9: the defense happens.; int7 & int9 -> int10: both the non-argenticness and the defense occurs.; int10 & sent4 -> int11: the stridulation does not occur.; int11 & sent7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__