the juxtaposition is a kind of a suprainfection and subsides AC.
sent1: the juxtaposition is not a epinephrine. sent2: something is a revolutionist if it is not a epinephrine. sent3: if that something is not azido and is not a autotype is false then it is not a Albanian. sent4: the fact that the juxtaposition is not azido and is not a autotype is wrong if the paisley is not doctrinal. sent5: something does subside AC and is a revolutionist if it is not a epinephrine. sent6: the ladder is not a kind of a problem or is not a territorial or both. sent7: if something is not a Cedrus then the fact that it is a epinephrine and it is a revolutionist is not true. sent8: if something is not a problem and/or is not territorial the metamorphism is not a Cedrus. sent9: if the metamorphism is doctrinal then the juxtaposition is a suprainfection. sent10: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not Albanian hold the fact that the paisley is non-azido thing that is not a autotype does not hold. sent11: the fact that that the paisley is a kind of azido thing that is not a kind of a autotype is correct is false. sent12: the fact that the paisley is azido and is not a autotype does not hold if there is something such that it is not Albanian. sent13: the fact that the paisley is not azido but it is a autotype is not correct if there is something such that it is not a Albanian. sent14: if the juxtaposition is not a kind of a epinephrine it is a revolutionist. sent15: the fact that the paisley is a kind of non-azido a autotype is not true. sent16: there is something such that it is a Albanian. sent17: if the fact that the paisley is not azido and is not a autotype is false then the metamorphism is doctrinal. sent18: the fact that something is a suprainfection and it subsides AC does not hold if it is not a Albanian.
sent5 -> int1: if the juxtaposition is not a kind of a epinephrine then it does subside AC and it is a revolutionist.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the juxtaposition does subside AC and it is a revolutionist.; int2 -> int3: the juxtaposition subsides AC.;
the fact that the juxtaposition is a suprainfection that does subside AC is incorrect.
sent18 -> int4: if the juxtaposition is not a Albanian then the fact that it is a suprainfection and it subsides AC is false.; sent3 -> int5: the juxtaposition is not Albanian if that it is not azido and is not a autotype is not true.; sent7 -> int6: the fact that the metamorphism is a epinephrine and it is a revolutionist is wrong if it is not a Cedrus.; sent6 -> int7: there exists something such that it either is not a problem or is not a territorial or both.; int7 & sent8 -> int8: that the metamorphism is not a Cedrus hold.; int6 & int8 -> int9: the fact that the metamorphism is a kind of a epinephrine that is a revolutionist is not right.; int9 -> int10: there exists something such that the fact that it is a epinephrine and a revolutionist is wrong.;
$hypothesis$ = the juxtaposition is a kind of a suprainfection and subsides AC. ; $context$ = sent1: the juxtaposition is not a epinephrine. sent2: something is a revolutionist if it is not a epinephrine. sent3: if that something is not azido and is not a autotype is false then it is not a Albanian. sent4: the fact that the juxtaposition is not azido and is not a autotype is wrong if the paisley is not doctrinal. sent5: something does subside AC and is a revolutionist if it is not a epinephrine. sent6: the ladder is not a kind of a problem or is not a territorial or both. sent7: if something is not a Cedrus then the fact that it is a epinephrine and it is a revolutionist is not true. sent8: if something is not a problem and/or is not territorial the metamorphism is not a Cedrus. sent9: if the metamorphism is doctrinal then the juxtaposition is a suprainfection. sent10: if there exists something such that the fact that it is not Albanian hold the fact that the paisley is non-azido thing that is not a autotype does not hold. sent11: the fact that that the paisley is a kind of azido thing that is not a kind of a autotype is correct is false. sent12: the fact that the paisley is azido and is not a autotype does not hold if there is something such that it is not Albanian. sent13: the fact that the paisley is not azido but it is a autotype is not correct if there is something such that it is not a Albanian. sent14: if the juxtaposition is not a kind of a epinephrine it is a revolutionist. sent15: the fact that the paisley is a kind of non-azido a autotype is not true. sent16: there is something such that it is a Albanian. sent17: if the fact that the paisley is not azido and is not a autotype is false then the metamorphism is doctrinal. sent18: the fact that something is a suprainfection and it subsides AC does not hold if it is not a Albanian. ; $proof$ = 
sent5 -> int1: if the juxtaposition is not a kind of a epinephrine then it does subside AC and it is a revolutionist.; int1 & sent1 -> int2: the juxtaposition does subside AC and it is a revolutionist.; int2 -> int3: the juxtaposition subsides AC.; __UNKNOWN__