there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-psychomotor thing that does exacerbate ARNG does not hold.
sent1: the mercer does not fossilize. sent2: if that something is not a mound and it is not a shakedown does not hold then the fact that it is exploratory is true. sent3: if there is something such that it is exploratory then the fact that the peasecod is not psychomotor and exacerbates ARNG is not right. sent4: if something is both not a mound and not a shakedown then the mercer does fossilize.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ortolan is not a mound and it is not a shakedown.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that it is not a mound and not a shakedown.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the mercer does fossilize.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the ortolan is not a mound and it is not shakedown does not hold.; sent2 -> int5: if that the ortolan does not mound and is not a shakedown is not right it is exploratory.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the ortolan is exploratory.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is exploratory.; int7 & sent3 -> int8: the fact that the peasecod is not psychomotor and does exacerbate ARNG is not correct.; int8 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-psychomotor thing that does exacerbate ARNG does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the mercer does not fossilize. sent2: if that something is not a mound and it is not a shakedown does not hold then the fact that it is exploratory is true. sent3: if there is something such that it is exploratory then the fact that the peasecod is not psychomotor and exacerbates ARNG is not right. sent4: if something is both not a mound and not a shakedown then the mercer does fossilize. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ortolan is not a mound and it is not a shakedown.; assump1 -> int1: there is something such that it is not a mound and not a shakedown.; int1 & sent4 -> int2: the mercer does fossilize.; int2 & sent1 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: that the ortolan is not a mound and it is not shakedown does not hold.; sent2 -> int5: if that the ortolan does not mound and is not a shakedown is not right it is exploratory.; int4 & int5 -> int6: the ortolan is exploratory.; int6 -> int7: there is something such that it is exploratory.; int7 & sent3 -> int8: the fact that the peasecod is not psychomotor and does exacerbate ARNG is not correct.; int8 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__