the fact that the autoclave does reunify treaty but it is not civic is not correct.
sent1: that the autoclave reunifies treaty and it is civic is not correct if the vocabulary does reunifies treaty. sent2: if something is a diffraction then the fact that it is not a sour and is not electrocardiographic is not correct. sent3: if something is a diffraction the fact that it is a sour that is not electrocardiographic is wrong. sent4: the rejection is a kind of a diffraction. sent5: the cloister is electrocardiographic. sent6: if the vocabulary reunifies treaty then that the autoclave reunifies treaty and is not civic does not hold. sent7: the vocabulary reunifies treaty if the module is not a Chemnitz. sent8: that something that is not a migraine but a Chemnitz does not reunify petticoat is not wrong. sent9: if the module does not reunify petticoat then the DAT is electrocardiographic. sent10: if something is a repression that it is not a bind and it is a sander is not correct. sent11: if the fact that the module is not a kind of a migraine but it is a Chemnitz is not true then that the vocabulary reunifies treaty is not false.
sent8 -> int1: if the module is not a migraine but it is a Chemnitz then it does not reunify petticoat.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the module is not a kind of a migraine and is a kind of a Chemnitz.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the module does not reunify petticoat.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the DAT is electrocardiographic.; sent2 -> int4: if the rejection is a diffraction the fact that it is not sour and not electrocardiographic does not hold.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: that the rejection is not a sour and not electrocardiographic does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the autoclave does reunify treaty but it is not civic is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: that the autoclave reunifies treaty and it is civic is not correct if the vocabulary does reunifies treaty. sent2: if something is a diffraction then the fact that it is not a sour and is not electrocardiographic is not correct. sent3: if something is a diffraction the fact that it is a sour that is not electrocardiographic is wrong. sent4: the rejection is a kind of a diffraction. sent5: the cloister is electrocardiographic. sent6: if the vocabulary reunifies treaty then that the autoclave reunifies treaty and is not civic does not hold. sent7: the vocabulary reunifies treaty if the module is not a Chemnitz. sent8: that something that is not a migraine but a Chemnitz does not reunify petticoat is not wrong. sent9: if the module does not reunify petticoat then the DAT is electrocardiographic. sent10: if something is a repression that it is not a bind and it is a sander is not correct. sent11: if the fact that the module is not a kind of a migraine but it is a Chemnitz is not true then that the vocabulary reunifies treaty is not false. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 -> int1: if the module is not a migraine but it is a Chemnitz then it does not reunify petticoat.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the module is not a kind of a migraine and is a kind of a Chemnitz.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the module does not reunify petticoat.; int2 & sent9 -> int3: the DAT is electrocardiographic.; sent2 -> int4: if the rejection is a diffraction the fact that it is not sour and not electrocardiographic does not hold.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: that the rejection is not a sour and not electrocardiographic does not hold.; __UNKNOWN__