the sampan is not a Raja.
sent1: the fact that the gearshift does not correspond hypertensive and does not dichotomize is wrong if the fact that the aquavit dichotomize is correct. sent2: the knitter does not correspond Eustoma. sent3: the heteroploid is impressive if the fact that it does correspond Eustoma and does not dichotomize does not hold. sent4: if the aquavit dichotomizes then the fact that the gearshift does correspond hypertensive and does not dichotomizes does not hold. sent5: that the heteroploid is impressive is not false if that the gearshift does not correspond hypertensive and does not dichotomize is not correct. sent6: something does correspond Eustoma if it does dichotomize. sent7: if the knitter antisepticizes Nepalese then the aquavit dichotomizes. sent8: if something is impressive then the fact that it does intuit is correct. sent9: if something does intuit then it avoids combatant. sent10: that the sampan is creative but it is not impressive is not true if the heteroploid is impressive. sent11: if something corresponds Eustoma it does antisepticize Nepalese and it is not a Raja. sent12: the knitter antisepticizes Nepalese but it does not correspond Eustoma. sent13: if the heteroploid is impressive the fact that the sampan is creative and impressive is false. sent14: that the gearshift corresponds hypertensive and does not dichotomize does not hold. sent15: if the sampan is impressive it intuits. sent16: the heteroploid is impressive if the gearshift does correspond hypertensive. sent17: something is a Raja if it does avoid combatant. sent18: if the fact that something is creative and is not impressive is not true then it intuits. sent19: the knitter is impressive. sent20: the fact that the sampan is creative and it is impressive is not correct.
sent12 -> int1: the knitter antisepticizes Nepalese.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the aquavit does dichotomize.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: that the gearshift does not correspond hypertensive and it does not dichotomize does not hold.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: the heteroploid is impressive.; int4 & sent10 -> int5: the fact that the sampan is a kind of creative thing that is not impressive is not correct.; sent18 -> int6: if the fact that the sampan is creative thing that is not impressive is false then it intuits.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the sampan does intuit.; sent9 -> int8: the sampan does avoid combatant if it intuits.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the sampan does avoid combatant.; sent17 -> int10: if the sampan avoids combatant it is a kind of a Raja.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the sampan is not a Raja.
sent11 -> int11: if the sampan corresponds Eustoma it antisepticizes Nepalese and it is not a Raja.; sent6 -> int12: if the sampan does dichotomize that it does correspond Eustoma hold.; sent19 -> int13: there exists something such that that it is impressive hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the sampan is not a Raja. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the gearshift does not correspond hypertensive and does not dichotomize is wrong if the fact that the aquavit dichotomize is correct. sent2: the knitter does not correspond Eustoma. sent3: the heteroploid is impressive if the fact that it does correspond Eustoma and does not dichotomize does not hold. sent4: if the aquavit dichotomizes then the fact that the gearshift does correspond hypertensive and does not dichotomizes does not hold. sent5: that the heteroploid is impressive is not false if that the gearshift does not correspond hypertensive and does not dichotomize is not correct. sent6: something does correspond Eustoma if it does dichotomize. sent7: if the knitter antisepticizes Nepalese then the aquavit dichotomizes. sent8: if something is impressive then the fact that it does intuit is correct. sent9: if something does intuit then it avoids combatant. sent10: that the sampan is creative but it is not impressive is not true if the heteroploid is impressive. sent11: if something corresponds Eustoma it does antisepticize Nepalese and it is not a Raja. sent12: the knitter antisepticizes Nepalese but it does not correspond Eustoma. sent13: if the heteroploid is impressive the fact that the sampan is creative and impressive is false. sent14: that the gearshift corresponds hypertensive and does not dichotomize does not hold. sent15: if the sampan is impressive it intuits. sent16: the heteroploid is impressive if the gearshift does correspond hypertensive. sent17: something is a Raja if it does avoid combatant. sent18: if the fact that something is creative and is not impressive is not true then it intuits. sent19: the knitter is impressive. sent20: the fact that the sampan is creative and it is impressive is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> int1: the knitter antisepticizes Nepalese.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the aquavit does dichotomize.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: that the gearshift does not correspond hypertensive and it does not dichotomize does not hold.; int3 & sent5 -> int4: the heteroploid is impressive.; int4 & sent10 -> int5: the fact that the sampan is a kind of creative thing that is not impressive is not correct.; sent18 -> int6: if the fact that the sampan is creative thing that is not impressive is false then it intuits.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the sampan does intuit.; sent9 -> int8: the sampan does avoid combatant if it intuits.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the sampan does avoid combatant.; sent17 -> int10: if the sampan avoids combatant it is a kind of a Raja.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__