there is something such that if it is not linguistics then that it does not simulate and is not inexpressible is incorrect.
sent1: if the antibody is linguistics the fact that it does not simulate and it is not inexpressible is wrong. sent2: if the antibody is not linguistics then that it does not simulate and is not inexpressible is false. sent3: if the antibody does not weed Ammodytidae it is not recreational and is non-linguistics. sent4: there exists something such that if it is not a antepenult then that it is both not a Cairo and not a faceted does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it is linguistics the fact that it does not simulate and it is not inexpressible is incorrect. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not linguistics it does not simulate and is expressible. sent7: the fact that the antibody does simulate but it is not inexpressible is wrong if it is not linguistics. sent8: the antibody does not corner Rotterdam and it is not linguistics if it does not transform. sent9: the fact that something does not weed brethren and is not determinable is not correct if that it does not find hold. sent10: the fact that the antibody does not simulate and is inexpressible is wrong if it is not linguistics. sent11: there is something such that if it is not linguistics then that it does not simulate and it is inexpressible is incorrect.
sent2 -> hypothesis;
there exists something such that if it does not find the fact that it does not weed brethren and it is not determinable is not right.
sent9 -> int1: if the arm does not find that it does not weed brethren and is not determinable does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not linguistics then that it does not simulate and is not inexpressible is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: if the antibody is linguistics the fact that it does not simulate and it is not inexpressible is wrong. sent2: if the antibody is not linguistics then that it does not simulate and is not inexpressible is false. sent3: if the antibody does not weed Ammodytidae it is not recreational and is non-linguistics. sent4: there exists something such that if it is not a antepenult then that it is both not a Cairo and not a faceted does not hold. sent5: there exists something such that if it is linguistics the fact that it does not simulate and it is not inexpressible is incorrect. sent6: there exists something such that if it is not linguistics it does not simulate and is expressible. sent7: the fact that the antibody does simulate but it is not inexpressible is wrong if it is not linguistics. sent8: the antibody does not corner Rotterdam and it is not linguistics if it does not transform. sent9: the fact that something does not weed brethren and is not determinable is not correct if that it does not find hold. sent10: the fact that the antibody does not simulate and is inexpressible is wrong if it is not linguistics. sent11: there is something such that if it is not linguistics then that it does not simulate and it is inexpressible is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__