the phenomenon is a commercial and/or it is starless.
sent1: the bollard is not unequivocal. sent2: the console is a quillwort and/or it is not caesural. sent3: the lekvar is not caesural if that it is not a kind of a supper is right. sent4: the lekvar is commercial. sent5: something is a Kent or it is not conclusive or both if it is not unequivocal. sent6: the phenomenon is starless if the lekvar is a kind of non-pyloric a supper. sent7: the bollard is a autodidact and it is caesural if the lekvar is not caesural. sent8: the bollard either is a kind of a Kent or is conclusive or both. sent9: if the bollard skims contrariness then it is not a supper. sent10: if that that something is not pyloric but it is a kind of a supper is right is not correct then it is not caesural. sent11: the lekvar is a kind of a supper. sent12: the phenomenon is unequivocal and it is a soapberry. sent13: if something is a kind of a Kent and/or it is not conclusive it is not caesural. sent14: if that that the phenomenon is not a commercial but it is starless is not right is true then it is not starless. sent15: the bollard is a autodidact.
sent10 -> int1: the lekvar is not caesural if the fact that it is not pyloric and it is a supper does not hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the lekvar is not pyloric and is a kind of a supper is wrong.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the lekvar is not caesural.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the bollard is a autodidact and it is caesural.; int3 -> int4: the bollard is caesural.; sent13 -> int5: the bollard is not caesural if it is either a Kent or not conclusive or both.; sent5 -> int6: the bollard is a Kent and/or is inconclusive if it is not unequivocal.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the bollard is a Kent and/or it is not conclusive.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the bollard is not caesural.; int4 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the lekvar is not pyloric but a supper.; int10 & sent6 -> int11: the phenomenon is starless.; int11 -> hypothesis;
the ready-made is pyloric.
$hypothesis$ = the phenomenon is a commercial and/or it is starless. ; $context$ = sent1: the bollard is not unequivocal. sent2: the console is a quillwort and/or it is not caesural. sent3: the lekvar is not caesural if that it is not a kind of a supper is right. sent4: the lekvar is commercial. sent5: something is a Kent or it is not conclusive or both if it is not unequivocal. sent6: the phenomenon is starless if the lekvar is a kind of non-pyloric a supper. sent7: the bollard is a autodidact and it is caesural if the lekvar is not caesural. sent8: the bollard either is a kind of a Kent or is conclusive or both. sent9: if the bollard skims contrariness then it is not a supper. sent10: if that that something is not pyloric but it is a kind of a supper is right is not correct then it is not caesural. sent11: the lekvar is a kind of a supper. sent12: the phenomenon is unequivocal and it is a soapberry. sent13: if something is a kind of a Kent and/or it is not conclusive it is not caesural. sent14: if that that the phenomenon is not a commercial but it is starless is not right is true then it is not starless. sent15: the bollard is a autodidact. ; $proof$ = 
sent10 -> int1: the lekvar is not caesural if the fact that it is not pyloric and it is a supper does not hold.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the lekvar is not pyloric and is a kind of a supper is wrong.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the lekvar is not caesural.; int2 & sent7 -> int3: the bollard is a autodidact and it is caesural.; int3 -> int4: the bollard is caesural.; sent13 -> int5: the bollard is not caesural if it is either a Kent or not conclusive or both.; sent5 -> int6: the bollard is a Kent and/or is inconclusive if it is not unequivocal.; int6 & sent1 -> int7: the bollard is a Kent and/or it is not conclusive.; int5 & int7 -> int8: the bollard is not caesural.; int4 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> int10: the lekvar is not pyloric but a supper.; int10 & sent6 -> int11: the phenomenon is starless.; int11 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__