the duffer is a kind of a Symplocus and it mounds kirtle.
sent1: there exists something such that it is unconquerable. sent2: the kirtle is a multiplicity. sent3: the duffer expires. sent4: the duffer is a multiplicity and is not non-asynergic. sent5: the duffer is both not censorial and a nebule. sent6: that the duffer is not unconquerable is not wrong. sent7: the duffer mounds Lahu if there exists something such that it is not obtrusive and it expires. sent8: if something is a multiplicity the fact that it is not a Symplocus and mounds Lahu is false. sent9: the duffer is unable and is counterclockwise if it does not medicate Cibotium. sent10: the fact that the shoebox does medicate Cibotium is correct. sent11: there exists something such that it is a kind of non-obtrusive thing that expires. sent12: the duffer does medicate Cibotium and does mound kirtle if the fact that it is not unconquerable is true. sent13: that the duffer is not an interim hold. sent14: the duffer is piano thing that is unmanageable. sent15: the recidivist is not a Symplocus. sent16: the fact that the campus is non-trabecular but it is a shortstop does not hold if that it is a stewpan is right.
sent11 & sent7 -> int1: the duffer does mound Lahu.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the duffer is not a kind of a Symplocus.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the duffer is not a Symplocus and does mound Lahu.; sent8 -> int3: the fact that the duffer is not a Symplocus and does mound Lahu is not true if it is a kind of a multiplicity.; sent4 -> int4: the duffer is a multiplicity.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the duffer is not a Symplocus and does mound Lahu is not correct.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the duffer is a kind of a Symplocus.; sent12 & sent6 -> int8: the duffer medicates Cibotium and mounds kirtle.; int8 -> int9: the duffer mounds kirtle.; int7 & int9 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the duffer is a kind of a Symplocus and it mounds kirtle. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is unconquerable. sent2: the kirtle is a multiplicity. sent3: the duffer expires. sent4: the duffer is a multiplicity and is not non-asynergic. sent5: the duffer is both not censorial and a nebule. sent6: that the duffer is not unconquerable is not wrong. sent7: the duffer mounds Lahu if there exists something such that it is not obtrusive and it expires. sent8: if something is a multiplicity the fact that it is not a Symplocus and mounds Lahu is false. sent9: the duffer is unable and is counterclockwise if it does not medicate Cibotium. sent10: the fact that the shoebox does medicate Cibotium is correct. sent11: there exists something such that it is a kind of non-obtrusive thing that expires. sent12: the duffer does medicate Cibotium and does mound kirtle if the fact that it is not unconquerable is true. sent13: that the duffer is not an interim hold. sent14: the duffer is piano thing that is unmanageable. sent15: the recidivist is not a Symplocus. sent16: the fact that the campus is non-trabecular but it is a shortstop does not hold if that it is a stewpan is right. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 & sent7 -> int1: the duffer does mound Lahu.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the duffer is not a kind of a Symplocus.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the duffer is not a Symplocus and does mound Lahu.; sent8 -> int3: the fact that the duffer is not a Symplocus and does mound Lahu is not true if it is a kind of a multiplicity.; sent4 -> int4: the duffer is a multiplicity.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the fact that the duffer is not a Symplocus and does mound Lahu is not correct.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the duffer is a kind of a Symplocus.; sent12 & sent6 -> int8: the duffer medicates Cibotium and mounds kirtle.; int8 -> int9: the duffer mounds kirtle.; int7 & int9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__