the lazuli is a kind of a funny that does tyrannize.
sent1: the collider is a cephalexin. sent2: the fact that if the fact that the dolman intrigues abstractionist hold then the aircraft is a kind of a Allegheny is not wrong. sent3: the dolman is a kind of a ketorolac. sent4: if the cefoperazone is inspiratory the lazuli is an aged. sent5: if something is not a cephalexin that it is a kind of a funny and tyrannizes is wrong. sent6: if something is not a backscratcher it does intrigue abstractionist. sent7: the lazuli intrigues abstractionist if the dolman does age. sent8: the lazuli is a funny. sent9: if the collider is a cephalexin the fact that the dolman does not intrigue subluxation and/or it is not a plank does not hold. sent10: that if the lazuli does age the lazuli does tyrannize is not false. sent11: the fact that the fact that the seltzer is not an aide and/or does not carpet Soave does not hold hold. sent12: the cefoperazone does plank. sent13: the dolman ages if the lazuli intrigues subluxation. sent14: something is a cephalexin if it does not tyrannize. sent15: the aircraft is not a kind of a Allegheny if that it either does not intrigue abstractionist or does not intrigue subluxation or both is incorrect. sent16: if the aircraft is a Allegheny then the cefoperazone is inspiratory. sent17: if the collider is a cephalexin and it is a backscratcher that the lazuli is not a kind of a cephalexin is true.
sent9 & sent1 -> int1: that either the dolman does not intrigue subluxation or it does not plank or both does not hold.; sent6 -> int2: the dolman intrigues abstractionist if it is not a kind of a backscratcher.;
the fact that the lazuli is a kind of a funny that tyrannizes is incorrect.
sent5 -> int3: that the lazuli is a kind of a funny that tyrannizes is false if it is not a kind of a cephalexin.;
$hypothesis$ = the lazuli is a kind of a funny that does tyrannize. ; $context$ = sent1: the collider is a cephalexin. sent2: the fact that if the fact that the dolman intrigues abstractionist hold then the aircraft is a kind of a Allegheny is not wrong. sent3: the dolman is a kind of a ketorolac. sent4: if the cefoperazone is inspiratory the lazuli is an aged. sent5: if something is not a cephalexin that it is a kind of a funny and tyrannizes is wrong. sent6: if something is not a backscratcher it does intrigue abstractionist. sent7: the lazuli intrigues abstractionist if the dolman does age. sent8: the lazuli is a funny. sent9: if the collider is a cephalexin the fact that the dolman does not intrigue subluxation and/or it is not a plank does not hold. sent10: that if the lazuli does age the lazuli does tyrannize is not false. sent11: the fact that the fact that the seltzer is not an aide and/or does not carpet Soave does not hold hold. sent12: the cefoperazone does plank. sent13: the dolman ages if the lazuli intrigues subluxation. sent14: something is a cephalexin if it does not tyrannize. sent15: the aircraft is not a kind of a Allegheny if that it either does not intrigue abstractionist or does not intrigue subluxation or both is incorrect. sent16: if the aircraft is a Allegheny then the cefoperazone is inspiratory. sent17: if the collider is a cephalexin and it is a backscratcher that the lazuli is not a kind of a cephalexin is true. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 & sent1 -> int1: that either the dolman does not intrigue subluxation or it does not plank or both does not hold.; sent6 -> int2: the dolman intrigues abstractionist if it is not a kind of a backscratcher.; __UNKNOWN__