the chough is autobiographical.
sent1: the vinegar is a Odontophorus. sent2: if the feijoa is autobiographical then it is a Maoist. sent3: the chough is a Elamite that is a drawl. sent4: the chough is integrative and appealable. sent5: if that something is integrative is right it is a Odontophorus. sent6: the chough is not autobiographical if the breechcloth is not autobiographical and it is not a Odontophorus. sent7: the breechcloth is a Odontophorus. sent8: the chough is integrative. sent9: the chough is autobiographical if the breechcloth is integrative. sent10: the nalorphine is integrative. sent11: if the breechcloth is a kind of a Stuyvesant then it is autobiographical. sent12: if that the chough is not a kind of a Stuyvesant is incorrect then the breechcloth is autobiographical. sent13: the member is a kind of a Odontophorus. sent14: the breechcloth is both a Odontophorus and a Stuyvesant. sent15: if the breechcloth is not a kind of a duologue then that the chough is infallible and is not autobiographical is not correct.
sent14 -> int1: the fact that the breechcloth is a Stuyvesant is true.;
the chough is not autobiographical.
$hypothesis$ = the chough is autobiographical. ; $context$ = sent1: the vinegar is a Odontophorus. sent2: if the feijoa is autobiographical then it is a Maoist. sent3: the chough is a Elamite that is a drawl. sent4: the chough is integrative and appealable. sent5: if that something is integrative is right it is a Odontophorus. sent6: the chough is not autobiographical if the breechcloth is not autobiographical and it is not a Odontophorus. sent7: the breechcloth is a Odontophorus. sent8: the chough is integrative. sent9: the chough is autobiographical if the breechcloth is integrative. sent10: the nalorphine is integrative. sent11: if the breechcloth is a kind of a Stuyvesant then it is autobiographical. sent12: if that the chough is not a kind of a Stuyvesant is incorrect then the breechcloth is autobiographical. sent13: the member is a kind of a Odontophorus. sent14: the breechcloth is both a Odontophorus and a Stuyvesant. sent15: if the breechcloth is not a kind of a duologue then that the chough is infallible and is not autobiographical is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 -> int1: the fact that the breechcloth is a Stuyvesant is true.; __UNKNOWN__