the witchgrass occupies.
sent1: if something is dark it does not assail. sent2: if the ceratodus does assail then the witchgrass does assail. sent3: something assails if that it is anaerobic is right. sent4: the fact that the ai does not assail and does not taste immunotherapy does not hold if something is not a kind of a dark. sent5: the ceratodus is anaerobic if something is a kind of a pieplant. sent6: if the ceratodus is a pieplant that is not a dark the crapshooter does assail. sent7: that if the avadavat is not a games-master then that the propylene is not synergistic and trusses planning is not correct hold. sent8: the fact that the avadavat is a games-master and is regimentals is wrong. sent9: something is nonjudgmental if it does not truss planning and/or is synergistic. sent10: the witchgrass does occupy if the propylene is antecedent. sent11: if that the sourwood is lacrimal thing that is not a tumblebug is right then that the ceratodus is dark is correct. sent12: if the fact that something is a kind of a pieplant and/or it is not an antecedent is not correct it is anaerobic. sent13: if the propylene is nonjudgmental the fact that it does not occupy and it is antecedent is not true. sent14: the sourwood is lacrimal. sent15: everything is lacrimal. sent16: the fact that the ceratodus is a pieplant and/or it is not antecedent does not hold if the crapshooter is not judgmental. sent17: everything is lacrimal and it is not a tumblebug. sent18: if that the crapshooter is not anaerobic and it is not a pieplant is not right the propylene is antecedent. sent19: if the ceratodus does not assail then the fact that the crapshooter is not anaerobic but it is a pieplant is incorrect. sent20: if the propylene is not a kind of a tumblebug that the crapshooter is a kind of non-antecedent thing that is anaerobic is incorrect. sent21: the sourwood does assail. sent22: if that the avadavat is a kind of a games-master and is regimentals is not correct then it is not a games-master. sent23: that the ceratodus is a kind of non-anaerobic thing that is antecedent does not hold if the propylene does not assail. sent24: the fact that either the propylene does not truss planning or it is synergistic or both is not false. sent25: if something is anaerobic then it is not a dark.
sent17 -> int1: the sourwood is not non-lacrimal but it is not a tumblebug.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the ceratodus is a kind of a dark.; sent1 -> int3: if the ceratodus is a kind of a dark then it does not assail.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the ceratodus does not assail.;
the witchgrass does not occupy.
sent3 -> int5: the ceratodus assails if it is anaerobic.; sent12 -> int6: the ceratodus is anaerobic if the fact that it is a pieplant and/or is not a kind of an antecedent does not hold.; sent22 & sent8 -> int7: the avadavat is not a games-master.; sent7 & int7 -> int8: the fact that the propylene is non-synergistic thing that trusses planning does not hold.; int8 -> int9: there exists something such that that it is not synergistic and does truss planning is not right.;
$hypothesis$ = the witchgrass occupies. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is dark it does not assail. sent2: if the ceratodus does assail then the witchgrass does assail. sent3: something assails if that it is anaerobic is right. sent4: the fact that the ai does not assail and does not taste immunotherapy does not hold if something is not a kind of a dark. sent5: the ceratodus is anaerobic if something is a kind of a pieplant. sent6: if the ceratodus is a pieplant that is not a dark the crapshooter does assail. sent7: that if the avadavat is not a games-master then that the propylene is not synergistic and trusses planning is not correct hold. sent8: the fact that the avadavat is a games-master and is regimentals is wrong. sent9: something is nonjudgmental if it does not truss planning and/or is synergistic. sent10: the witchgrass does occupy if the propylene is antecedent. sent11: if that the sourwood is lacrimal thing that is not a tumblebug is right then that the ceratodus is dark is correct. sent12: if the fact that something is a kind of a pieplant and/or it is not an antecedent is not correct it is anaerobic. sent13: if the propylene is nonjudgmental the fact that it does not occupy and it is antecedent is not true. sent14: the sourwood is lacrimal. sent15: everything is lacrimal. sent16: the fact that the ceratodus is a pieplant and/or it is not antecedent does not hold if the crapshooter is not judgmental. sent17: everything is lacrimal and it is not a tumblebug. sent18: if that the crapshooter is not anaerobic and it is not a pieplant is not right the propylene is antecedent. sent19: if the ceratodus does not assail then the fact that the crapshooter is not anaerobic but it is a pieplant is incorrect. sent20: if the propylene is not a kind of a tumblebug that the crapshooter is a kind of non-antecedent thing that is anaerobic is incorrect. sent21: the sourwood does assail. sent22: if that the avadavat is a kind of a games-master and is regimentals is not correct then it is not a games-master. sent23: that the ceratodus is a kind of non-anaerobic thing that is antecedent does not hold if the propylene does not assail. sent24: the fact that either the propylene does not truss planning or it is synergistic or both is not false. sent25: if something is anaerobic then it is not a dark. ; $proof$ = 
sent17 -> int1: the sourwood is not non-lacrimal but it is not a tumblebug.; int1 & sent11 -> int2: the ceratodus is a kind of a dark.; sent1 -> int3: if the ceratodus is a kind of a dark then it does not assail.; int2 & int3 -> int4: the ceratodus does not assail.; __UNKNOWN__