if the alsatian is a Pterocarpus the prostate is not subsequent.
sent1: if something is not meridional then it is subsequent and a Pterocarpus. sent2: the trave is unbridgeable if the rotogravure is not an auctioneer but a boondoggle. sent3: the prostate is not a Pterocarpus if the fact that the trave is not subsequent but it does deviate rebuff is incorrect. sent4: if the gnomon is not meridional then that the alsatian is not non-harmful and not meridional is wrong. sent5: if that something is harmful but not meridional is not right then it is not a kind of a Pterocarpus. sent6: if the trave is unbridgeable and it deviates rebuff then the fact that the prostate is not subsequent is true. sent7: the gnomon is not meridional if the fact that the rotogravure is not a kind of an auctioneer and is a boondoggle is not correct. sent8: The rebuff deviates trave. sent9: if the gnomon is not meridional that the alsatian is harmful and is meridional is not right. sent10: if the rotogravure is meridional but it is not harmful the trave is not meridional.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the rotogravure is not an auctioneer and boondoggles is false.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the gnomon is not meridional.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the alsatian is a kind of harmful thing that is not meridional is not right.; sent5 -> int3: if that the alsatian is both harmful and not meridional is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Pterocarpus.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the alsatian is not a Pterocarpus.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the alsatian is a kind of a Pterocarpus.; int4 & assump2 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the rotogravure is not an auctioneer and is a boondoggle.; int6 & sent2 -> int7: the trave is unbridgeable.;
that the trave is subsequent is correct.
sent1 -> int8: the trave is subsequent and it is a Pterocarpus if it is not meridional.;
$hypothesis$ = if the alsatian is a Pterocarpus the prostate is not subsequent. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not meridional then it is subsequent and a Pterocarpus. sent2: the trave is unbridgeable if the rotogravure is not an auctioneer but a boondoggle. sent3: the prostate is not a Pterocarpus if the fact that the trave is not subsequent but it does deviate rebuff is incorrect. sent4: if the gnomon is not meridional then that the alsatian is not non-harmful and not meridional is wrong. sent5: if that something is harmful but not meridional is not right then it is not a kind of a Pterocarpus. sent6: if the trave is unbridgeable and it deviates rebuff then the fact that the prostate is not subsequent is true. sent7: the gnomon is not meridional if the fact that the rotogravure is not a kind of an auctioneer and is a boondoggle is not correct. sent8: The rebuff deviates trave. sent9: if the gnomon is not meridional that the alsatian is harmful and is meridional is not right. sent10: if the rotogravure is meridional but it is not harmful the trave is not meridional. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the rotogravure is not an auctioneer and boondoggles is false.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: the gnomon is not meridional.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the fact that the alsatian is a kind of harmful thing that is not meridional is not right.; sent5 -> int3: if that the alsatian is both harmful and not meridional is incorrect then it is not a kind of a Pterocarpus.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the alsatian is not a Pterocarpus.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the alsatian is a kind of a Pterocarpus.; int4 & assump2 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the rotogravure is not an auctioneer and is a boondoggle.; int6 & sent2 -> int7: the trave is unbridgeable.; __UNKNOWN__