the sidestroke does not occur and/or the stoking Nereid does not occur.
sent1: the ritualism occurs. sent2: the fact that the essentialness occurs and/or the pileup does not occur is not true if the flag does not occur. sent3: if the ritualism occurs then both the non-archegonialness and the product happens. sent4: the stumbling acanthus and the anti-semiticness occurs. sent5: the stumbling antidote does not occur if the stumbling Confederacy does not occur. sent6: if the fact that the essentialness happens or the pileup does not occur or both is false the stumbling Confederacy does not occur. sent7: if the flag happens then that the fact that both the non-archegonialness and the product occurs is incorrect is not incorrect. sent8: the satiating happens if the satiating occurs and/or the pileup does not occur. sent9: the essentialness triggers that the flag does not occur and the pileup does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the flag occurs.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: that the non-archegonialness and the product happens is false.; sent3 & sent1 -> int2: the non-archegonialness and the product happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the flag does not occur.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the fact that the essentialness happens or the pileup does not occur or both is not true.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the stumbling Confederacy does not occur.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the stumbling antidote does not occur.; sent4 -> int8: the stumbling acanthus happens.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the stumbling acanthus but not the stumbling antidote occurs.;
the satiating occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the sidestroke does not occur and/or the stoking Nereid does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: the ritualism occurs. sent2: the fact that the essentialness occurs and/or the pileup does not occur is not true if the flag does not occur. sent3: if the ritualism occurs then both the non-archegonialness and the product happens. sent4: the stumbling acanthus and the anti-semiticness occurs. sent5: the stumbling antidote does not occur if the stumbling Confederacy does not occur. sent6: if the fact that the essentialness happens or the pileup does not occur or both is false the stumbling Confederacy does not occur. sent7: if the flag happens then that the fact that both the non-archegonialness and the product occurs is incorrect is not incorrect. sent8: the satiating happens if the satiating occurs and/or the pileup does not occur. sent9: the essentialness triggers that the flag does not occur and the pileup does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the flag occurs.; sent7 & assump1 -> int1: that the non-archegonialness and the product happens is false.; sent3 & sent1 -> int2: the non-archegonialness and the product happens.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the flag does not occur.; int4 & sent2 -> int5: the fact that the essentialness happens or the pileup does not occur or both is not true.; int5 & sent6 -> int6: the stumbling Confederacy does not occur.; int6 & sent5 -> int7: the stumbling antidote does not occur.; sent4 -> int8: the stumbling acanthus happens.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the stumbling acanthus but not the stumbling antidote occurs.; __UNKNOWN__