the septum does not deduce docility but it is not non-intradepartmental.
sent1: if something is pyrochemical then it is not a lathi but a Cestum. sent2: that the Miller does skim asyndeton but it is not a gook is not right if it does not incurvate. sent3: if the fact that the pillbox does not languish is not incorrect that the septum does deduce docility and does not languish is not correct. sent4: the Miller does not incurvate if the pillbox does not languish and is a Crohn. sent5: the septum does not deduce docility but it is intradepartmental if it is acervate. sent6: if the Miller is a gook the septum is not non-acervate. sent7: if there exists something such that it does languish and it is a Crohn then the peridotite is a kind of a triggerfish. sent8: if that the Miller does skim asyndeton and is not a kind of a gook is wrong the septum is acervate. sent9: the pillbox does not languish if the psychiatrist is a kind of a Crohn. sent10: there exists something such that it is interdisciplinary. sent11: the fact that the fact that the Miller does skim asyndeton and it is a gook is false hold if it does not incurvate. sent12: the Miller does not incurvate and is intradepartmental if the septum is intradepartmental. sent13: there is something such that it is not non-interdisciplinary and it does not deduce blaring. sent14: the fact that the pillbox does not languish and is a kind of a Crohn is not incorrect if that the psychiatrist is a Crohn is not wrong. sent15: if there is something such that it is a kind of interdisciplinary thing that does not deduce blaring then the peridotite is not a kind of a Homaridae. sent16: if the peridotite is not a Homaridae the fact that the psychiatrist is a triggerfish but it is not a Homaridae does not hold. sent17: the septum does not deduce docility. sent18: if the fact that the psychiatrist is both a triggerfish and not a Homaridae does not hold it is a kind of a Crohn. sent19: the fact that the psychiatrist is a kind of a triggerfish and it is a Homaridae is not correct.
sent13 & sent15 -> int1: the fact that the peridotite is not a Homaridae is not incorrect.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: that the psychiatrist is a kind of a triggerfish and is not a Homaridae does not hold.; int2 & sent18 -> int3: the psychiatrist is a Crohn.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the pillbox does not languish and is a kind of a Crohn.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: the Miller does not incurvate.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: that the fact that the Miller does skim asyndeton and is not a gook is false is not false.; int6 & sent8 -> int7: the septum is acervate.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the dependant is not a kind of a lathi but it is a kind of a Cestum if it is not non-pyrochemical.
sent1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the septum does not deduce docility but it is not non-intradepartmental. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is pyrochemical then it is not a lathi but a Cestum. sent2: that the Miller does skim asyndeton but it is not a gook is not right if it does not incurvate. sent3: if the fact that the pillbox does not languish is not incorrect that the septum does deduce docility and does not languish is not correct. sent4: the Miller does not incurvate if the pillbox does not languish and is a Crohn. sent5: the septum does not deduce docility but it is intradepartmental if it is acervate. sent6: if the Miller is a gook the septum is not non-acervate. sent7: if there exists something such that it does languish and it is a Crohn then the peridotite is a kind of a triggerfish. sent8: if that the Miller does skim asyndeton and is not a kind of a gook is wrong the septum is acervate. sent9: the pillbox does not languish if the psychiatrist is a kind of a Crohn. sent10: there exists something such that it is interdisciplinary. sent11: the fact that the fact that the Miller does skim asyndeton and it is a gook is false hold if it does not incurvate. sent12: the Miller does not incurvate and is intradepartmental if the septum is intradepartmental. sent13: there is something such that it is not non-interdisciplinary and it does not deduce blaring. sent14: the fact that the pillbox does not languish and is a kind of a Crohn is not incorrect if that the psychiatrist is a Crohn is not wrong. sent15: if there is something such that it is a kind of interdisciplinary thing that does not deduce blaring then the peridotite is not a kind of a Homaridae. sent16: if the peridotite is not a Homaridae the fact that the psychiatrist is a triggerfish but it is not a Homaridae does not hold. sent17: the septum does not deduce docility. sent18: if the fact that the psychiatrist is both a triggerfish and not a Homaridae does not hold it is a kind of a Crohn. sent19: the fact that the psychiatrist is a kind of a triggerfish and it is a Homaridae is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent13 & sent15 -> int1: the fact that the peridotite is not a Homaridae is not incorrect.; int1 & sent16 -> int2: that the psychiatrist is a kind of a triggerfish and is not a Homaridae does not hold.; int2 & sent18 -> int3: the psychiatrist is a Crohn.; int3 & sent14 -> int4: the pillbox does not languish and is a kind of a Crohn.; int4 & sent4 -> int5: the Miller does not incurvate.; int5 & sent2 -> int6: that the fact that the Miller does skim asyndeton and is not a gook is false is not false.; int6 & sent8 -> int7: the septum is acervate.; int7 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__