the workpiece is choleraic.
sent1: the undergraduate is not accusative. sent2: the duchess does not submarine. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not lymphocytic and does not varnish muesli is not right the workpiece is choleraic. sent4: that the duchess is both not collegiate and non-natriuretic is not correct if that the Taracahitian submarines is not wrong. sent5: that the Taracahitian is a kind of non-lymphocytic thing that varnishes muesli is incorrect. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it is not lymphocytic and it does varnish muesli is not right. sent7: the fact that the workpiece is a perfumer and/or it is lunar if there exists something such that it is a perfumer hold. sent8: if the workpiece is a perfumer then it does not ignore Confederacy. sent9: the pillow is a perfumer if something is not an accusative. sent10: there exists something such that it is not lymphocytic and does not varnish muesli. sent11: there exists something such that that it is lymphocytic and does not varnish muesli is not correct. sent12: the fact that the fact that the fact that the Taracahitian is not lymphocytic and does not varnish muesli is right does not hold is true if the duchess does not submarine. sent13: the immunogen is choleraic. sent14: if that the duchess ignores Confederacy but it is not choleraic is correct then the workpiece is not choleraic. sent15: if something does varnish muesli the workpiece is choleraic.
sent12 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the Taracahitian is a kind of non-lymphocytic thing that does not varnish muesli is incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is non-lymphocytic thing that does not varnish muesli is wrong.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that that it is not collegiate and is not natriuretic does not hold.
sent1 -> int3: there is something such that it is not an accusative.; int3 & sent9 -> int4: the pillow is a perfumer.; int4 -> int5: there is something such that it is a kind of a perfumer.; int5 & sent7 -> int6: the workpiece is a kind of a perfumer or it is lunar or both.;
$hypothesis$ = the workpiece is choleraic. ; $context$ = sent1: the undergraduate is not accusative. sent2: the duchess does not submarine. sent3: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not lymphocytic and does not varnish muesli is not right the workpiece is choleraic. sent4: that the duchess is both not collegiate and non-natriuretic is not correct if that the Taracahitian submarines is not wrong. sent5: that the Taracahitian is a kind of non-lymphocytic thing that varnishes muesli is incorrect. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it is not lymphocytic and it does varnish muesli is not right. sent7: the fact that the workpiece is a perfumer and/or it is lunar if there exists something such that it is a perfumer hold. sent8: if the workpiece is a perfumer then it does not ignore Confederacy. sent9: the pillow is a perfumer if something is not an accusative. sent10: there exists something such that it is not lymphocytic and does not varnish muesli. sent11: there exists something such that that it is lymphocytic and does not varnish muesli is not correct. sent12: the fact that the fact that the fact that the Taracahitian is not lymphocytic and does not varnish muesli is right does not hold is true if the duchess does not submarine. sent13: the immunogen is choleraic. sent14: if that the duchess ignores Confederacy but it is not choleraic is correct then the workpiece is not choleraic. sent15: if something does varnish muesli the workpiece is choleraic. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 & sent2 -> int1: the fact that the Taracahitian is a kind of non-lymphocytic thing that does not varnish muesli is incorrect.; int1 -> int2: there exists something such that the fact that it is non-lymphocytic thing that does not varnish muesli is wrong.; int2 & sent3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__