the bed is a magnetograph.
sent1: if the bed is not a magnetograph but nosocomial then it does not scaffold. sent2: the bottle is not a kind of a lemma if the bed scaffolds and is not nosocomial. sent3: that the portrayal elaborates toasting and it is nosocomial is wrong. sent4: something is a kind of a scaffold that is a kind of a magnetograph if it is not a jugular. sent5: there is something such that that it is a ACLANT that does not elaborate accidence is incorrect. sent6: the portrayal is not a jugular if the fact that the naturalist is a Gilman that does not elaborate chug does not hold. sent7: if the bottle does not scaffold then the bed is not a scaffold and does not elaborate toasting. sent8: that the revenant does not elaborate accidence is true. sent9: the syncretism is not a magnetograph. sent10: if the portrayal is not jugular the bottle leases parasail and it elaborates toasting. sent11: the fact that the bed is not a scaffold is not wrong if there exists something such that it is not a magnetograph. sent12: if that something is either not nosocomial or not a lemma or both is not correct the fact that it is not a magnetograph is false. sent13: that that the naturalist is a kind of a Gilman but it does not elaborate chug is not false is not right. sent14: the revenant is a pixel. sent15: if the bed is not nosocomial the revenant is a kind of nosocomial thing that does not elaborate toasting. sent16: the revenant is not a lemma if there exists something such that that that it is a ACLANT and it does not elaborate accidence is not incorrect is not right. sent17: the revenant is nosocomial. sent18: the caramel is not a lemma but it is electoral. sent19: that if the bottle is not a lemma then the revenant does not lease parasail but it is saprophytic is not false. sent20: if the bed is not a scaffold and it does not elaborate toasting then it is not a magnetograph. sent21: there exists something such that it elaborates toasting and is nosocomial. sent22: if something that is not a kind of a magnetograph is a lemma the revenant does not elaborate toasting. sent23: the bottle is not a scaffold if there is something such that it is not a lemma and is nosocomial.
sent5 & sent16 -> int1: the revenant is not a kind of a lemma.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the revenant is not a lemma but it is nosocomial.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a lemma and is nosocomial is not incorrect.; int3 & sent23 -> int4: the bottle does not scaffold.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the bed is not a scaffold and it does not elaborate toasting.; int5 & sent20 -> hypothesis;
the bed is a kind of a magnetograph.
sent12 -> int6: if the fact that either the bed is not nosocomial or it is not a lemma or both does not hold it is a magnetograph.; sent6 & sent13 -> int7: the portrayal is not a jugular.; sent10 & int7 -> int8: the bottle leases parasail and it does elaborate toasting.; int8 -> int9: the bottle elaborates toasting.; int9 -> int10: there is something such that it elaborates toasting.;
$hypothesis$ = the bed is a magnetograph. ; $context$ = sent1: if the bed is not a magnetograph but nosocomial then it does not scaffold. sent2: the bottle is not a kind of a lemma if the bed scaffolds and is not nosocomial. sent3: that the portrayal elaborates toasting and it is nosocomial is wrong. sent4: something is a kind of a scaffold that is a kind of a magnetograph if it is not a jugular. sent5: there is something such that that it is a ACLANT that does not elaborate accidence is incorrect. sent6: the portrayal is not a jugular if the fact that the naturalist is a Gilman that does not elaborate chug does not hold. sent7: if the bottle does not scaffold then the bed is not a scaffold and does not elaborate toasting. sent8: that the revenant does not elaborate accidence is true. sent9: the syncretism is not a magnetograph. sent10: if the portrayal is not jugular the bottle leases parasail and it elaborates toasting. sent11: the fact that the bed is not a scaffold is not wrong if there exists something such that it is not a magnetograph. sent12: if that something is either not nosocomial or not a lemma or both is not correct the fact that it is not a magnetograph is false. sent13: that that the naturalist is a kind of a Gilman but it does not elaborate chug is not false is not right. sent14: the revenant is a pixel. sent15: if the bed is not nosocomial the revenant is a kind of nosocomial thing that does not elaborate toasting. sent16: the revenant is not a lemma if there exists something such that that that it is a ACLANT and it does not elaborate accidence is not incorrect is not right. sent17: the revenant is nosocomial. sent18: the caramel is not a lemma but it is electoral. sent19: that if the bottle is not a lemma then the revenant does not lease parasail but it is saprophytic is not false. sent20: if the bed is not a scaffold and it does not elaborate toasting then it is not a magnetograph. sent21: there exists something such that it elaborates toasting and is nosocomial. sent22: if something that is not a kind of a magnetograph is a lemma the revenant does not elaborate toasting. sent23: the bottle is not a scaffold if there is something such that it is not a lemma and is nosocomial. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 & sent16 -> int1: the revenant is not a kind of a lemma.; int1 & sent17 -> int2: the revenant is not a lemma but it is nosocomial.; int2 -> int3: there is something such that that it is not a kind of a lemma and is nosocomial is not incorrect.; int3 & sent23 -> int4: the bottle does not scaffold.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the bed is not a scaffold and it does not elaborate toasting.; int5 & sent20 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__