the fact that the combination does not occur is not incorrect if that the incriminating aqua and the non-coeliacness occurs is not correct.
sent1: if that the gemination but not the arachnoid occurs is false the unsupportiveness does not occur. sent2: if the psychosurgery does not occur not the superiority but the joint occurs. sent3: the incriminating characterization does not occur. sent4: the clutch happens if that either the incriminating aqua does not occur or the coeliacness happens or both is wrong. sent5: if the fact that the figuration occurs and the custard-likeness happens does not hold then the psychosurgery does not occur. sent6: that the superiority does not occur brings about that the incriminating Esaki and the combination occurs. sent7: not the joint but the superiority occurs if the psychosurgery happens. sent8: if the meioticness does not occur and the seamanlikeness does not occur then the indication happens. sent9: the cavalcade does not occur. sent10: the paging fete happens and the auxeticness happens. sent11: the coeliacness does not occur. sent12: the gemination does not occur and the ebbtide happens. sent13: if the revolutionariness does not occur the fact that the figuration and the custard-likeness occurs does not hold. sent14: the dusking does not occur. sent15: the incriminating Esaki does not occur if the non-jointness and the superiority happens. sent16: the psychosurgery and the figuration happens. sent17: the fact that the glottochronologicalness happens is right. sent18: the eponymousness does not occur if the log does not occur and the nontraditionalness does not occur. sent19: the fireball occurs. sent20: the revolutionariness is prevented by that the washing-up does not occur.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the incriminating aqua occurs.; assump1 & sent11 -> int1: the incriminating aqua happens and the coeliacness does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that that the incriminating aqua and the non-coeliacness happens does not hold.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the incriminating aqua does not occur.; sent16 -> int4: the psychosurgery happens.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: the jointness does not occur and the superiority occurs.; sent15 & int5 -> int6: that the incriminating Esaki does not occur is right.; int3 & int6 -> int7: the incriminating Esaki does not occur and the incriminating aqua does not occur.;
the clutch occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the combination does not occur is not incorrect if that the incriminating aqua and the non-coeliacness occurs is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the gemination but not the arachnoid occurs is false the unsupportiveness does not occur. sent2: if the psychosurgery does not occur not the superiority but the joint occurs. sent3: the incriminating characterization does not occur. sent4: the clutch happens if that either the incriminating aqua does not occur or the coeliacness happens or both is wrong. sent5: if the fact that the figuration occurs and the custard-likeness happens does not hold then the psychosurgery does not occur. sent6: that the superiority does not occur brings about that the incriminating Esaki and the combination occurs. sent7: not the joint but the superiority occurs if the psychosurgery happens. sent8: if the meioticness does not occur and the seamanlikeness does not occur then the indication happens. sent9: the cavalcade does not occur. sent10: the paging fete happens and the auxeticness happens. sent11: the coeliacness does not occur. sent12: the gemination does not occur and the ebbtide happens. sent13: if the revolutionariness does not occur the fact that the figuration and the custard-likeness occurs does not hold. sent14: the dusking does not occur. sent15: the incriminating Esaki does not occur if the non-jointness and the superiority happens. sent16: the psychosurgery and the figuration happens. sent17: the fact that the glottochronologicalness happens is right. sent18: the eponymousness does not occur if the log does not occur and the nontraditionalness does not occur. sent19: the fireball occurs. sent20: the revolutionariness is prevented by that the washing-up does not occur. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the incriminating aqua occurs.; assump1 & sent11 -> int1: the incriminating aqua happens and the coeliacness does not occur.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that that the incriminating aqua and the non-coeliacness happens does not hold.; int1 & assump2 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the incriminating aqua does not occur.; sent16 -> int4: the psychosurgery happens.; sent7 & int4 -> int5: the jointness does not occur and the superiority occurs.; sent15 & int5 -> int6: that the incriminating Esaki does not occur is right.; int3 & int6 -> int7: the incriminating Esaki does not occur and the incriminating aqua does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__