that the undercut happens triggers that the devitalization does not occur and the distinguishableness does not occur.
sent1: if that the scenicness occurs but the happiness does not occur is false the distinguishableness happens. sent2: the undercutting does not occur if the necroticness happens and the devitalization occurs. sent3: the fact that both the distinguishableness and the non-scenicness happens is incorrect. sent4: the distinguishableness does not occur if the fact that both the distinguishableness and the non-scenicness happens does not hold. sent5: that the necroticness does not occur and/or the dangling goshawk does not occur triggers that the unservileness happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the devitalization happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the undercutting occurs.; sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the distinguishableness does not occur.;
the unservileness and the cross-examination happens.
$hypothesis$ = that the undercut happens triggers that the devitalization does not occur and the distinguishableness does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the scenicness occurs but the happiness does not occur is false the distinguishableness happens. sent2: the undercutting does not occur if the necroticness happens and the devitalization occurs. sent3: the fact that both the distinguishableness and the non-scenicness happens is incorrect. sent4: the distinguishableness does not occur if the fact that both the distinguishableness and the non-scenicness happens does not hold. sent5: that the necroticness does not occur and/or the dangling goshawk does not occur triggers that the unservileness happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the devitalization happens.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the undercutting occurs.; sent4 & sent3 -> int1: the distinguishableness does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__