the acrogen is not classicistic.
sent1: there is something such that that it either is ovular or is a obviation or both does not hold. sent2: if something is Soviets it is not an overview but heavenly. sent3: that the specialist is a kind of a glucagon and/or it is not interplanetary does not hold. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a glucagon and/or is not interplanetary is incorrect then that the use is an infernal is correct. sent5: if the Rambouillet is not non-heavenly that the acrogen is not a Rossini and/or is non-heavenly is incorrect. sent6: the Rambouillet is Soviets if the use is an infernal. sent7: if the fact that something is not a Rossini and/or it is heavenly is not correct it is classicistic.
sent3 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a glucagon or is not interplanetary or both does not hold.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the use is an infernal hold.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the Rambouillet is Soviets.; sent2 -> int4: if the Rambouillet is Soviets then it is not an overview and it is heavenly.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Rambouillet is not a kind of an overview and is heavenly.; int5 -> int6: the Rambouillet is heavenly.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: that the acrogen is not a Rossini or heavenly or both is false.; sent7 -> int8: if the fact that the fact that the acrogen is not a Rossini and/or is heavenly hold is not correct it is not non-classicistic.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the acrogen is not classicistic. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that that it either is ovular or is a obviation or both does not hold. sent2: if something is Soviets it is not an overview but heavenly. sent3: that the specialist is a kind of a glucagon and/or it is not interplanetary does not hold. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a glucagon and/or is not interplanetary is incorrect then that the use is an infernal is correct. sent5: if the Rambouillet is not non-heavenly that the acrogen is not a Rossini and/or is non-heavenly is incorrect. sent6: the Rambouillet is Soviets if the use is an infernal. sent7: if the fact that something is not a Rossini and/or it is heavenly is not correct it is classicistic. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a kind of a glucagon or is not interplanetary or both does not hold.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: that the use is an infernal hold.; int2 & sent6 -> int3: the Rambouillet is Soviets.; sent2 -> int4: if the Rambouillet is Soviets then it is not an overview and it is heavenly.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the Rambouillet is not a kind of an overview and is heavenly.; int5 -> int6: the Rambouillet is heavenly.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: that the acrogen is not a Rossini or heavenly or both is false.; sent7 -> int8: if the fact that the fact that the acrogen is not a Rossini and/or is heavenly hold is not correct it is not non-classicistic.; int7 & int8 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__