the shortstop is acetic and/or is not migratory.
sent1: if there are unicameral and vagile things then the Austrian is not migratory. sent2: if that either something is unicameral or it is migratory or both is not true then it is a battlesight. sent3: the fact that something is unicameral is not incorrect. sent4: the mat is migratory. sent5: the shortstop is unicameral and is migratory. sent6: that the shortstop is acetic and/or it is not migratory is not correct if the Austrian is vagile. sent7: if the wrester is not unicameral then the fact that it either is a kind of a Belemnitidae or is not vagile or both does not hold. sent8: if the fact that something is a battlesight or is not a dissoluteness or both is incorrect then it is unicameral. sent9: the mat does glare plurality and it is vagile. sent10: that the mat is a kind of a battlesight and/or it is not a dissoluteness is not true. sent11: the shortstop is either acetic or not migratory or both if the Austrian is not migratory. sent12: something does glare plurality but it is not unicameral if it is not paleolithic. sent13: the wrester is not unicameral if that the Austrian is not migratory and is unicameral is not right. sent14: the mat glares plurality.
sent8 -> int1: the mat is unicameral if that it is a kind of a battlesight or it is not a dissoluteness or both does not hold.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the mat is unicameral.; sent9 -> int3: the mat is vagile.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the mat is a kind of unicameral thing that is not non-vagile.; int4 -> int5: something is unicameral and vagile.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: the Austrian is not migratory.; int6 & sent11 -> hypothesis;
that the shortstop is either acetic or not migratory or both is not correct.
sent12 -> int7: the spirograph does glare plurality but it is not unicameral if it is not paleolithic.;
$hypothesis$ = the shortstop is acetic and/or is not migratory. ; $context$ = sent1: if there are unicameral and vagile things then the Austrian is not migratory. sent2: if that either something is unicameral or it is migratory or both is not true then it is a battlesight. sent3: the fact that something is unicameral is not incorrect. sent4: the mat is migratory. sent5: the shortstop is unicameral and is migratory. sent6: that the shortstop is acetic and/or it is not migratory is not correct if the Austrian is vagile. sent7: if the wrester is not unicameral then the fact that it either is a kind of a Belemnitidae or is not vagile or both does not hold. sent8: if the fact that something is a battlesight or is not a dissoluteness or both is incorrect then it is unicameral. sent9: the mat does glare plurality and it is vagile. sent10: that the mat is a kind of a battlesight and/or it is not a dissoluteness is not true. sent11: the shortstop is either acetic or not migratory or both if the Austrian is not migratory. sent12: something does glare plurality but it is not unicameral if it is not paleolithic. sent13: the wrester is not unicameral if that the Austrian is not migratory and is unicameral is not right. sent14: the mat glares plurality. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 -> int1: the mat is unicameral if that it is a kind of a battlesight or it is not a dissoluteness or both does not hold.; int1 & sent10 -> int2: the mat is unicameral.; sent9 -> int3: the mat is vagile.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the mat is a kind of unicameral thing that is not non-vagile.; int4 -> int5: something is unicameral and vagile.; int5 & sent1 -> int6: the Austrian is not migratory.; int6 & sent11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__