the afghan is not a here.
sent1: the fact that the hypsometer does not destain Echium and is a focalization is false if the evaluator is not a flair. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is both a Jespersen and unafraid is not true. sent3: there is something such that it is a Jespersen and not unafraid. sent4: if the evaluator is not a flair the fact that the hypsometer does not destain Echium and is not a focalization does not hold. sent5: there is something such that that it destains Echium and is not a focalization is not true. sent6: the tartrate is not unafraid. sent7: the afghan is not a here if there is something such that it is a kind of a focalization. sent8: if there exists something such that that it is a Jespersen and is not unafraid is wrong that the burglar is not a Qaddafi is right. sent9: the evaluator is not a flair if the tartrate is a Jespersen but it is not unafraid. sent10: the fact that the hypsometer does not destain Echium but it is a kind of a focalization is wrong. sent11: the Primaxin is a clock but it is not a focalization. sent12: the burglar is a Qaddafi. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it does not destain Echium and is a focalization is false.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the tartrate is both a Jespersen and not unafraid is not true.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a Jespersen but not unafraid is wrong.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the burglar is not a Qaddafi.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the tartrate is a Jespersen but it is not unafraid.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the fact that the evaluator is not a flair is not wrong.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: that the hypsometer does not destain Echium and it is not a focalization is not true.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it does not destain Echium and it is not a focalization is not true.;
$hypothesis$ = the afghan is not a here. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the hypsometer does not destain Echium and is a focalization is false if the evaluator is not a flair. sent2: there is something such that the fact that it is both a Jespersen and unafraid is not true. sent3: there is something such that it is a Jespersen and not unafraid. sent4: if the evaluator is not a flair the fact that the hypsometer does not destain Echium and is not a focalization does not hold. sent5: there is something such that that it destains Echium and is not a focalization is not true. sent6: the tartrate is not unafraid. sent7: the afghan is not a here if there is something such that it is a kind of a focalization. sent8: if there exists something such that that it is a Jespersen and is not unafraid is wrong that the burglar is not a Qaddafi is right. sent9: the evaluator is not a flair if the tartrate is a Jespersen but it is not unafraid. sent10: the fact that the hypsometer does not destain Echium but it is a kind of a focalization is wrong. sent11: the Primaxin is a clock but it is not a focalization. sent12: the burglar is a Qaddafi. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it does not destain Echium and is a focalization is false. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the tartrate is both a Jespersen and not unafraid is not true.; assump1 -> int1: there exists something such that the fact that it is a Jespersen but not unafraid is wrong.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: the burglar is not a Qaddafi.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the tartrate is a Jespersen but it is not unafraid.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the fact that the evaluator is not a flair is not wrong.; int5 & sent4 -> int6: that the hypsometer does not destain Echium and it is not a focalization is not true.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that the fact that it does not destain Echium and it is not a focalization is not true.; __UNKNOWN__