the hippopotamus is undependable.
sent1: there is something such that it is invisible. sent2: the fact that something is both not apicultural and inefficient does not hold if it is not invisible. sent3: if something is not a Vanbrugh then it is a Mondrian that is not undependable. sent4: there are apicultural things. sent5: the skibob is invisible. sent6: the fact that the hippopotamus is not undependable if the newspaper is a Mondrian but it is undependable is correct. sent7: the hippopotamus is undependable if a non-vesicular thing is a sociometry. sent8: if something is both a Vanbrugh and apicultural then the skibob is inefficient. sent9: the newspaper is clamatorial. sent10: there is something such that it is not vesicular. sent11: that the skibob is not vesicular is not incorrect if it is inefficient and it is invisible. sent12: the newspaper is not a Mondrian but it is a Vanbrugh. sent13: the skibob is a sociometry if that it does crust blastoma and/or it is not clamatorial is not right. sent14: if the fact that something is both not a Vanbrugh and not a sociometry is false it is a sociometry. sent15: that the skibob crusts blastoma and/or it is not clamatorial is not true.
sent12 -> int1: the newspaper is a Vanbrugh.; sent13 & sent15 -> int2: the skibob is a sociometry.;
the escarpment is a sociometry.
sent14 -> int3: the escarpment is a sociometry if that it is not a kind of a Vanbrugh and is not a sociometry is false.;
$hypothesis$ = the hippopotamus is undependable. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that it is invisible. sent2: the fact that something is both not apicultural and inefficient does not hold if it is not invisible. sent3: if something is not a Vanbrugh then it is a Mondrian that is not undependable. sent4: there are apicultural things. sent5: the skibob is invisible. sent6: the fact that the hippopotamus is not undependable if the newspaper is a Mondrian but it is undependable is correct. sent7: the hippopotamus is undependable if a non-vesicular thing is a sociometry. sent8: if something is both a Vanbrugh and apicultural then the skibob is inefficient. sent9: the newspaper is clamatorial. sent10: there is something such that it is not vesicular. sent11: that the skibob is not vesicular is not incorrect if it is inefficient and it is invisible. sent12: the newspaper is not a Mondrian but it is a Vanbrugh. sent13: the skibob is a sociometry if that it does crust blastoma and/or it is not clamatorial is not right. sent14: if the fact that something is both not a Vanbrugh and not a sociometry is false it is a sociometry. sent15: that the skibob crusts blastoma and/or it is not clamatorial is not true. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> int1: the newspaper is a Vanbrugh.; sent13 & sent15 -> int2: the skibob is a sociometry.; __UNKNOWN__