the olive does not stoke.
sent1: the fact that the trey is not intelligent and does adjoin hyacinth is not correct. sent2: the rheumatic is a catarrhine. sent3: the diflunisal is either a Buchner or long or both if there exists something such that it does not emulsify macrotus. sent4: if something is long then it does remodel Shingon. sent5: if the trey is not intelligent then the olive does adjoin hyacinth. sent6: the olive adjoins hyacinth if the fact that the trey is not bumpy but intelligent does not hold. sent7: the rheumatic does emulsify loanword. sent8: there is nothing such that it is non-bumpy thing that is intelligent. sent9: if that that the hyacinth does not stoke but it does expectorate hold is not true the olive does not stoke. sent10: something that does adjoin hyacinth does stoke. sent11: if something is indeterminate and it does not emulsify Luda then it does not adjoin hyacinth. sent12: something does remodel conspicuousness and does not symbolize if it remodels Shingon. sent13: if something is a kind of a Buchner the fact that it does not remodel Shingon is not correct. sent14: that the hyacinth does not stoke and does expectorate does not hold if the Lamarckian does not adjoin hyacinth. sent15: the trey does stoke if it is bumpy. sent16: if the rheumatic does emulsify loanword it is yeasty. sent17: the olive is bumpy. sent18: something is non-determinate thing that does not emulsify Luda if it is not a custom-made. sent19: if the rheumatic is a catarrhine that is yeasty that the satinwood does not emulsify macrotus is not wrong. sent20: if something that does remodel conspicuousness does not symbolize then it protects.
sent8 -> int1: the fact that the trey is non-bumpy thing that is intelligent is not correct.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the olive adjoins hyacinth.; sent10 -> int3: if the olive adjoins hyacinth then it does stoke.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis;
the olive does not stoke.
sent11 -> int4: the Lamarckian does not adjoin hyacinth if it is a kind of non-determinate thing that does not emulsify Luda.; sent18 -> int5: the Lamarckian is not determinate and does not emulsify Luda if it is not custom-made.; sent20 -> int6: the diflunisal does protect if it remodels conspicuousness and it does not symbolize.; sent12 -> int7: if the diflunisal remodels Shingon then that it does remodel conspicuousness and does not symbolize is right.; sent16 & sent7 -> int8: the rheumatic is yeasty.; sent2 & int8 -> int9: the rheumatic is a kind of catarrhine thing that is yeasty.; sent19 & int9 -> int10: the satinwood does not emulsify macrotus.; int10 -> int11: there exists something such that it does not emulsify macrotus.; int11 & sent3 -> int12: that the diflunisal is a kind of a Buchner or is long or both is correct.; sent13 -> int13: if the diflunisal is a Buchner it does remodel Shingon.; sent4 -> int14: if the diflunisal is long then it remodels Shingon.; int12 & int13 & int14 -> int15: the diflunisal remodels Shingon.; int7 & int15 -> int16: the diflunisal does remodel conspicuousness but it does not symbolize.; int6 & int16 -> int17: the diflunisal does protect.; int17 -> int18: something protects.;
$hypothesis$ = the olive does not stoke. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the trey is not intelligent and does adjoin hyacinth is not correct. sent2: the rheumatic is a catarrhine. sent3: the diflunisal is either a Buchner or long or both if there exists something such that it does not emulsify macrotus. sent4: if something is long then it does remodel Shingon. sent5: if the trey is not intelligent then the olive does adjoin hyacinth. sent6: the olive adjoins hyacinth if the fact that the trey is not bumpy but intelligent does not hold. sent7: the rheumatic does emulsify loanword. sent8: there is nothing such that it is non-bumpy thing that is intelligent. sent9: if that that the hyacinth does not stoke but it does expectorate hold is not true the olive does not stoke. sent10: something that does adjoin hyacinth does stoke. sent11: if something is indeterminate and it does not emulsify Luda then it does not adjoin hyacinth. sent12: something does remodel conspicuousness and does not symbolize if it remodels Shingon. sent13: if something is a kind of a Buchner the fact that it does not remodel Shingon is not correct. sent14: that the hyacinth does not stoke and does expectorate does not hold if the Lamarckian does not adjoin hyacinth. sent15: the trey does stoke if it is bumpy. sent16: if the rheumatic does emulsify loanword it is yeasty. sent17: the olive is bumpy. sent18: something is non-determinate thing that does not emulsify Luda if it is not a custom-made. sent19: if the rheumatic is a catarrhine that is yeasty that the satinwood does not emulsify macrotus is not wrong. sent20: if something that does remodel conspicuousness does not symbolize then it protects. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 -> int1: the fact that the trey is non-bumpy thing that is intelligent is not correct.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the olive adjoins hyacinth.; sent10 -> int3: if the olive adjoins hyacinth then it does stoke.; int2 & int3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__