the Breton accredits exemplar.
sent1: there exists something such that it is not unshapely. sent2: something accredits Nanticoke if it is not a kind of a gamboge and it does not fill incorrectness. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it is not unshapely hold the dodger is not a voyeur but live. sent4: if the laurel purports and/or it is a gamboge then the uakari is not a gamboge. sent5: the uakari is a thumbtack. sent6: if the watercolor does not accredit Nanticoke then that the shambles does not accredit dodger and accredits otologist is false. sent7: the fact that the uakari does not fill incorrectness hold if the dodger is not a voyeur and does live. sent8: if the uakari accredits Nanticoke and does thumbtack then the watercolor does not accredits Nanticoke. sent9: if something does not accredit otologist it is a Fez and opens. sent10: the fact that the legs does not accredit exemplar is not false if there is something such that it is not non-resinlike and it is not a abulia. sent11: the laurel does purport and/or is a gamboge. sent12: if the fact that something does not accredit dodger but it accredits otologist is incorrect then that it does not accredits otologist is not false. sent13: if the shambles is a Fez then the legs is both not enthusiastic and not angiocarpic. sent14: everything is resinlike and is not a kind of a abulia. sent15: the Breton is not angiocarpic and accredits exemplar if the legs does not accredits exemplar.
sent14 -> int1: the gorilla is resinlike and is not a abulia.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is resinlike and it is not a abulia.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the legs does not accredit exemplar.; sent15 & int3 -> int4: the Breton is not angiocarpic but it accredits exemplar.; int4 -> hypothesis;
the Breton does not accredit exemplar.
sent9 -> int5: if the shambles does not accredit otologist it is a kind of a Fez and it is open.; sent12 -> int6: the shambles does not accredit otologist if the fact that it does not accredit dodger and it does accredit otologist does not hold.; sent2 -> int7: if the uakari is not a gamboge and it does not fill incorrectness then the fact that it accredits Nanticoke is correct.; sent4 & sent11 -> int8: the uakari is not a gamboge.; sent1 & sent3 -> int9: the dodger is not a voyeur but it is live.; sent7 & int9 -> int10: that the uakari does not fill incorrectness hold.; int8 & int10 -> int11: the uakari is not a kind of a gamboge and does not fill incorrectness.; int7 & int11 -> int12: the uakari accredits Nanticoke.; int12 & sent5 -> int13: the uakari does accredit Nanticoke and it thumbtacks.; sent8 & int13 -> int14: the watercolor does not accredit Nanticoke.; sent6 & int14 -> int15: the fact that the shambles does not accredit dodger and accredits otologist does not hold.; int6 & int15 -> int16: that the shambles accredits otologist is not correct.; int5 & int16 -> int17: the shambles is a Fez and it is an open.; int17 -> int18: the shambles is a Fez.; sent13 & int18 -> int19: the legs is both unenthusiastic and not angiocarpic.; int19 -> int20: something is unenthusiastic and not angiocarpic.;
$hypothesis$ = the Breton accredits exemplar. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is not unshapely. sent2: something accredits Nanticoke if it is not a kind of a gamboge and it does not fill incorrectness. sent3: if there is something such that the fact that it is not unshapely hold the dodger is not a voyeur but live. sent4: if the laurel purports and/or it is a gamboge then the uakari is not a gamboge. sent5: the uakari is a thumbtack. sent6: if the watercolor does not accredit Nanticoke then that the shambles does not accredit dodger and accredits otologist is false. sent7: the fact that the uakari does not fill incorrectness hold if the dodger is not a voyeur and does live. sent8: if the uakari accredits Nanticoke and does thumbtack then the watercolor does not accredits Nanticoke. sent9: if something does not accredit otologist it is a Fez and opens. sent10: the fact that the legs does not accredit exemplar is not false if there is something such that it is not non-resinlike and it is not a abulia. sent11: the laurel does purport and/or is a gamboge. sent12: if the fact that something does not accredit dodger but it accredits otologist is incorrect then that it does not accredits otologist is not false. sent13: if the shambles is a Fez then the legs is both not enthusiastic and not angiocarpic. sent14: everything is resinlike and is not a kind of a abulia. sent15: the Breton is not angiocarpic and accredits exemplar if the legs does not accredits exemplar. ; $proof$ = 
sent14 -> int1: the gorilla is resinlike and is not a abulia.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that it is resinlike and it is not a abulia.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the legs does not accredit exemplar.; sent15 & int3 -> int4: the Breton is not angiocarpic but it accredits exemplar.; int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__