there exists something such that if it is not impotent then that it is not a pia and/or it overruns cigarillo does not hold.
sent1: there is something such that if it is not impotent that it is a kind of a pia and/or it does overrun cigarillo is incorrect. sent2: there is something such that if it is not incomprehensible then it is rickettsial. sent3: there is something such that if it is impotent the fact that it is not a pia and/or it overruns cigarillo is incorrect. sent4: if something is not impotent then that it is not a kind of a pia and/or does overrun cigarillo is wrong. sent5: the exegete is a pia if it is not impotent. sent6: there is something such that if it is not impotent either it is not a kind of a pia or it does overrun cigarillo or both.
sent4 -> int1: that the fact that the exegete either is not a pia or overruns cigarillo or both is not wrong is incorrect if it is not impotent.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not impotent then that it is not a pia and/or it overruns cigarillo does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if it is not impotent that it is a kind of a pia and/or it does overrun cigarillo is incorrect. sent2: there is something such that if it is not incomprehensible then it is rickettsial. sent3: there is something such that if it is impotent the fact that it is not a pia and/or it overruns cigarillo is incorrect. sent4: if something is not impotent then that it is not a kind of a pia and/or does overrun cigarillo is wrong. sent5: the exegete is a pia if it is not impotent. sent6: there is something such that if it is not impotent either it is not a kind of a pia or it does overrun cigarillo or both. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> int1: that the fact that the exegete either is not a pia or overruns cigarillo or both is not wrong is incorrect if it is not impotent.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__