that the stockpot does not slice colloid and is not non-dioecious does not hold.
sent1: if the fact that the gig is not a molarity hold it is a kind of a cellist and it is a boil. sent2: something does not slice colloid but it is dioecious if the fact that it is not a kind of a molarity hold. sent3: the fact that the bolero is a kind of a dashiki that does not cheerlead is false. sent4: the gig is a boil. sent5: if the gig is not a molarity then it is a boil. sent6: if the gig is a cellist the bolero does not cheerlead. sent7: the bolero does not cheerlead. sent8: if the gig slices colloid that the stockpot does not slices colloid but it is a kind of a molarity is not correct. sent9: the fact that the stockpot does slice colloid and it is dioecious is false. sent10: if something is a kind of a molarity it does slice perfume. sent11: the fact that the stockpot does not slice colloid and is dioecious is not true if the classicist does slice colloid. sent12: the classicist is a molarity. sent13: the bolero does dash and does not cheerlead if the gig is a cellist. sent14: the fact that the bolero dashes and it does cheerlead is not right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gig is not a molarity.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the gig is a cellist and does boil.; int1 -> int2: that the gig is a cellist is right.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the bolero dashes and does not cheerlead.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the gig is a kind of a molarity is not incorrect.; sent10 -> int6: if the fact that the gig is a molarity is correct then it does slice perfume.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the gig slices perfume.;
the stockpot does not slice colloid and is dioecious.
sent2 -> int8: if the stockpot is not a molarity then it does not slice colloid and is dioecious.;
$hypothesis$ = that the stockpot does not slice colloid and is not non-dioecious does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: if the fact that the gig is not a molarity hold it is a kind of a cellist and it is a boil. sent2: something does not slice colloid but it is dioecious if the fact that it is not a kind of a molarity hold. sent3: the fact that the bolero is a kind of a dashiki that does not cheerlead is false. sent4: the gig is a boil. sent5: if the gig is not a molarity then it is a boil. sent6: if the gig is a cellist the bolero does not cheerlead. sent7: the bolero does not cheerlead. sent8: if the gig slices colloid that the stockpot does not slices colloid but it is a kind of a molarity is not correct. sent9: the fact that the stockpot does slice colloid and it is dioecious is false. sent10: if something is a kind of a molarity it does slice perfume. sent11: the fact that the stockpot does not slice colloid and is dioecious is not true if the classicist does slice colloid. sent12: the classicist is a molarity. sent13: the bolero does dash and does not cheerlead if the gig is a cellist. sent14: the fact that the bolero dashes and it does cheerlead is not right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the gig is not a molarity.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the gig is a cellist and does boil.; int1 -> int2: that the gig is a cellist is right.; int2 & sent13 -> int3: the bolero dashes and does not cheerlead.; int3 & sent3 -> int4: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int4 -> int5: the fact that the gig is a kind of a molarity is not incorrect.; sent10 -> int6: if the fact that the gig is a molarity is correct then it does slice perfume.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the gig slices perfume.; __UNKNOWN__