the rockcress does besot cauda.
sent1: the fact that the rockcress is not a kind of a decision and it is sworn is not correct. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is an interceptor hold. sent3: the hypobasidium is a kind of an interceptor if the backbench is not sublittoral. sent4: the hygrophyte is not unsworn. sent5: something is a kind of an abbe if the fact that it is unsworn is not wrong. sent6: if the hygrophyte is sublittoral then the backbench subrogates denunciation. sent7: if the rockcress does not lysogenize sertularian then the fact that it does not subrogate denunciation and is a decision does not hold. sent8: the fact that the backbench is not radiolucent but it does flight is not true if it is ovine. sent9: the backbench does not besot gallop and is sworn. sent10: something that is a kind of a decision besots cauda. sent11: something is sublittoral but it does not besot cauda if the fact that it is a kind of an interceptor is true. sent12: that the hygrophyte besots gallop is true. sent13: the fact that the hygrophyte does not besot cauda and does not subrogate denunciation is not correct. sent14: the hygrophyte lysogenizes sertularian but it does not subrogate denunciation. sent15: the hygrophyte lysogenizes Leontodon and it is a gamp. sent16: that the backbench is not an interceptor but it besots gallop does not hold if it subrogates denunciation. sent17: the rockcress is not a decision if that that it does not subrogate denunciation and it is a decision hold is not correct. sent18: if there is something such that it is an abbe and it is an interceptor then the rockcress is a decision. sent19: the backbench is non-unsworn thing that does not besot cauda. sent20: if the backbench is sublittoral that it does not besot gallop and is not unsworn is wrong. sent21: the backbench is ovine.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the backbench is sublittoral.; sent20 & assump1 -> int1: that the backbench does not besot gallop and it is not unsworn is incorrect.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the backbench is not sublittoral.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the hypobasidium is a kind of an interceptor.; sent14 -> int5: the hygrophyte does lysogenize sertularian.; sent10 -> int6: the rockcress does besot cauda if it is a decision.;
the rockcress does not besot cauda.
sent11 -> int7: the rockcress is a kind of sublittoral thing that does not besot cauda if it is an interceptor.; sent8 & sent21 -> int8: that the backbench is a kind of non-radiolucent thing that is a flight is not right.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that the fact that it is not radiolucent and it flights is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = the rockcress does besot cauda. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the rockcress is not a kind of a decision and it is sworn is not correct. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is an interceptor hold. sent3: the hypobasidium is a kind of an interceptor if the backbench is not sublittoral. sent4: the hygrophyte is not unsworn. sent5: something is a kind of an abbe if the fact that it is unsworn is not wrong. sent6: if the hygrophyte is sublittoral then the backbench subrogates denunciation. sent7: if the rockcress does not lysogenize sertularian then the fact that it does not subrogate denunciation and is a decision does not hold. sent8: the fact that the backbench is not radiolucent but it does flight is not true if it is ovine. sent9: the backbench does not besot gallop and is sworn. sent10: something that is a kind of a decision besots cauda. sent11: something is sublittoral but it does not besot cauda if the fact that it is a kind of an interceptor is true. sent12: that the hygrophyte besots gallop is true. sent13: the fact that the hygrophyte does not besot cauda and does not subrogate denunciation is not correct. sent14: the hygrophyte lysogenizes sertularian but it does not subrogate denunciation. sent15: the hygrophyte lysogenizes Leontodon and it is a gamp. sent16: that the backbench is not an interceptor but it besots gallop does not hold if it subrogates denunciation. sent17: the rockcress is not a decision if that that it does not subrogate denunciation and it is a decision hold is not correct. sent18: if there is something such that it is an abbe and it is an interceptor then the rockcress is a decision. sent19: the backbench is non-unsworn thing that does not besot cauda. sent20: if the backbench is sublittoral that it does not besot gallop and is not unsworn is wrong. sent21: the backbench is ovine. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the backbench is sublittoral.; sent20 & assump1 -> int1: that the backbench does not besot gallop and it is not unsworn is incorrect.; int1 & sent9 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the backbench is not sublittoral.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: the hypobasidium is a kind of an interceptor.; sent14 -> int5: the hygrophyte does lysogenize sertularian.; sent10 -> int6: the rockcress does besot cauda if it is a decision.; __UNKNOWN__