the fact that the washstand is not a kind of a Chirico is not incorrect.
sent1: the fact that something does not cream chemistry and is a homunculus is not correct if it does not decrease prerequisite. sent2: the sultan is not a Chirico. sent3: something does not decrease prerequisite if the fact that it is not a founder and it does decrease prerequisite is false. sent4: if that something does not cream chemistry but it is a homunculus is not true then that it is a Chirico is true. sent5: the employee creams chemistry if that the washstand does start oiled and is not a forelimb is not true. sent6: that the fact that the washstand is inoperable and not a Windsor hold does not hold if that the employee is not a Chirico is true. sent7: the employee is not hemolytic if there is something such that the fact that it does not laud and is hemolytic does not hold. sent8: if the fact that the employee does cream chemistry and does decrease prerequisite is not true then it does not cream chemistry. sent9: the fact that the fact that the gargoyle is not a kind of a stoplight and is not a kind of a Satyridae is wrong is right. sent10: that the festoon does not laud and is hemolytic does not hold if the fact that the walk-on is not a stoplight is right. sent11: the fact that the washstand does start oiled and it is a forelimb is not right. sent12: if something is non-hemolytic then the fact that it decreases prerequisite and is a founder is incorrect. sent13: something that is not a homunculus does not cream chemistry and is not a Chirico. sent14: the fact that the employee creams chemistry and does decrease prerequisite is not right. sent15: the fact that the washstand does start oiled and it is a forelimb is wrong if it is a Chirico. sent16: if the fact that the gargoyle is both not a stoplight and not a Satyridae is wrong the walk-on is not a stoplight.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the washstand is a Chirico.; sent8 & sent14 -> int1: the employee does not cream chemistry.;
the washstand is a Chirico.
sent4 -> int2: if that the washstand does not cream chemistry and is a kind of a homunculus does not hold then that it is a Chirico hold.; sent1 -> int3: the fact that the washstand does not cream chemistry but it is a homunculus is not correct if it does not decrease prerequisite.; sent3 -> int4: the fact that the washstand does not decrease prerequisite is not wrong if that it does not founder and decrease prerequisite is not correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the washstand is not a kind of a Chirico is not incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that something does not cream chemistry and is a homunculus is not correct if it does not decrease prerequisite. sent2: the sultan is not a Chirico. sent3: something does not decrease prerequisite if the fact that it is not a founder and it does decrease prerequisite is false. sent4: if that something does not cream chemistry but it is a homunculus is not true then that it is a Chirico is true. sent5: the employee creams chemistry if that the washstand does start oiled and is not a forelimb is not true. sent6: that the fact that the washstand is inoperable and not a Windsor hold does not hold if that the employee is not a Chirico is true. sent7: the employee is not hemolytic if there is something such that the fact that it does not laud and is hemolytic does not hold. sent8: if the fact that the employee does cream chemistry and does decrease prerequisite is not true then it does not cream chemistry. sent9: the fact that the fact that the gargoyle is not a kind of a stoplight and is not a kind of a Satyridae is wrong is right. sent10: that the festoon does not laud and is hemolytic does not hold if the fact that the walk-on is not a stoplight is right. sent11: the fact that the washstand does start oiled and it is a forelimb is not right. sent12: if something is non-hemolytic then the fact that it decreases prerequisite and is a founder is incorrect. sent13: something that is not a homunculus does not cream chemistry and is not a Chirico. sent14: the fact that the employee creams chemistry and does decrease prerequisite is not right. sent15: the fact that the washstand does start oiled and it is a forelimb is wrong if it is a Chirico. sent16: if the fact that the gargoyle is both not a stoplight and not a Satyridae is wrong the walk-on is not a stoplight. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the washstand is a Chirico.; sent8 & sent14 -> int1: the employee does not cream chemistry.; __UNKNOWN__