the fact that the grandparent is not a affirmativeness but circadian is not true.
sent1: the fact that the grandparent is a primo but it does not stump is not right if the HIV does not restore tastefulness. sent2: the grandparent is not obvious. sent3: the HIV does not restore tastefulness if that it is both not an ultimate and a crabgrass is incorrect. sent4: if something is not a kind of a primo then the fact that it is not a affirmativeness and is circadian is false. sent5: the fact that the reaction is a Orycteropus and is not a kind of a Polynesian is not correct. sent6: if that the grandparent is not a crabgrass hold then that the HIV is circadian but it is non-blastemal is not correct. sent7: the artillery does not dissimilate norm and is blastemal. sent8: the grandparent is narrowing if that it is a kind of a primo and it is not a kind of a stumping does not hold. sent9: the fact that the HIV is a narrowing and blastemal does not hold if the fact that the grandparent does not restore tastefulness is not false. sent10: the Argentinian is not a affirmativeness but it does restore Wroclaw. sent11: the grandparent is not a kind of a Sericocarpus. sent12: the HIV does not restore tastefulness if it is not a crabgrass. sent13: the grandparent is glandular. sent14: the fact that the fact that the HIV is circadian thing that is a kind of an ultimate is not correct is not incorrect if the grandparent is not a crabgrass. sent15: the fact that the HIV is not ultimate but it is a kind of a crabgrass is wrong. sent16: the HIV is not a stumping and does not restore tastefulness if it is not a narrowing. sent17: the grandparent is both blastemal and circadian. sent18: the grandparent is not a affirmativeness if it does narrow. sent19: something is a Gothic if it does restore tastefulness.
sent3 & sent15 -> int1: the HIV does not restore tastefulness.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the grandparent is a primo and is not a stumping does not hold.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the fact that the grandparent is narrowing hold.; int3 & sent18 -> int4: the grandparent is not a affirmativeness.; sent17 -> int5: the grandparent is circadian.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis;
that the grandparent is not a affirmativeness but it is circadian is incorrect.
sent4 -> int6: that the grandparent is not a affirmativeness but circadian does not hold if it is not a primo.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the grandparent is not a affirmativeness but circadian is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the grandparent is a primo but it does not stump is not right if the HIV does not restore tastefulness. sent2: the grandparent is not obvious. sent3: the HIV does not restore tastefulness if that it is both not an ultimate and a crabgrass is incorrect. sent4: if something is not a kind of a primo then the fact that it is not a affirmativeness and is circadian is false. sent5: the fact that the reaction is a Orycteropus and is not a kind of a Polynesian is not correct. sent6: if that the grandparent is not a crabgrass hold then that the HIV is circadian but it is non-blastemal is not correct. sent7: the artillery does not dissimilate norm and is blastemal. sent8: the grandparent is narrowing if that it is a kind of a primo and it is not a kind of a stumping does not hold. sent9: the fact that the HIV is a narrowing and blastemal does not hold if the fact that the grandparent does not restore tastefulness is not false. sent10: the Argentinian is not a affirmativeness but it does restore Wroclaw. sent11: the grandparent is not a kind of a Sericocarpus. sent12: the HIV does not restore tastefulness if it is not a crabgrass. sent13: the grandparent is glandular. sent14: the fact that the fact that the HIV is circadian thing that is a kind of an ultimate is not correct is not incorrect if the grandparent is not a crabgrass. sent15: the fact that the HIV is not ultimate but it is a kind of a crabgrass is wrong. sent16: the HIV is not a stumping and does not restore tastefulness if it is not a narrowing. sent17: the grandparent is both blastemal and circadian. sent18: the grandparent is not a affirmativeness if it does narrow. sent19: something is a Gothic if it does restore tastefulness. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 & sent15 -> int1: the HIV does not restore tastefulness.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the fact that the grandparent is a primo and is not a stumping does not hold.; int2 & sent8 -> int3: the fact that the grandparent is narrowing hold.; int3 & sent18 -> int4: the grandparent is not a affirmativeness.; sent17 -> int5: the grandparent is circadian.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__