the bedder is a tophus.
sent1: something is pupillary if either it does not ranch or it does investigate invention or both. sent2: the mahuang is a ranching or it does investigate invention or both. sent3: the fact that the efflorescence is not optional but it is linguistic is not right if it is a skiing. sent4: if the mahuang does investigate barratry and it is arteriolar it is not pupillary. sent5: the bedder is a tophus if the vacuum is a cellulosic. sent6: the fact that the vacuum is not pupillary hold if the cat's-ear does not ranch and does not investigate invention. sent7: if something does not investigate barratry and is arteriolar then it is not pupillary. sent8: everything does not ranch or investigates invention or both. sent9: if something that is not allelic is a siren it is not interfacial. sent10: if the fact that something does coin and diffuses HS2 is right that it does not diffuse Putin is not incorrect. sent11: if something is optional then the fact that it either is a hang or is not a kind of a cellulosic or both is not correct. sent12: the vacuum is not a kind of a cellulosic if the fact that the keratinization is either a hang or not a cellulosic or both is not right. sent13: the cat's-ear is not a coin if the fritillary is a kind of a past and it coin. sent14: something is not a kind of a ranching and it does not investigate invention if that it does not coin is not false. sent15: if the fact that the efflorescence is not optional and is linguistic does not hold then the fact that the keratinization is optional hold. sent16: the mahuang does not investigate barratry. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it investigates barratry and it is not non-arteriolar does not hold. sent18: that the mahuang investigates barratry and it is arteriolar is not right. sent19: if something is pupillary and is a kind of a ranching then it is not a kind of a cellulosic.
sent7 -> int1: the mahuang is not pupillary if it does not investigate barratry and it is arteriolar.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mahuang does not investigate barratry but it is arteriolar.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the mahuang is not pupillary.; sent1 -> int3: if the mahuang is not a ranching and/or it does investigate invention then it is pupillary.; sent8 -> int4: the mahuang either does not ranch or does investigate invention or both.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the mahuang is pupillary.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the mahuang does not investigate barratry but it is arteriolar is incorrect.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it does not investigate barratry and it is arteriolar is not correct.;
if the mahuang is not allelic but it is a kind of a siren then it is not interfacial.
sent9 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the bedder is a tophus. ; $context$ = sent1: something is pupillary if either it does not ranch or it does investigate invention or both. sent2: the mahuang is a ranching or it does investigate invention or both. sent3: the fact that the efflorescence is not optional but it is linguistic is not right if it is a skiing. sent4: if the mahuang does investigate barratry and it is arteriolar it is not pupillary. sent5: the bedder is a tophus if the vacuum is a cellulosic. sent6: the fact that the vacuum is not pupillary hold if the cat's-ear does not ranch and does not investigate invention. sent7: if something does not investigate barratry and is arteriolar then it is not pupillary. sent8: everything does not ranch or investigates invention or both. sent9: if something that is not allelic is a siren it is not interfacial. sent10: if the fact that something does coin and diffuses HS2 is right that it does not diffuse Putin is not incorrect. sent11: if something is optional then the fact that it either is a hang or is not a kind of a cellulosic or both is not correct. sent12: the vacuum is not a kind of a cellulosic if the fact that the keratinization is either a hang or not a cellulosic or both is not right. sent13: the cat's-ear is not a coin if the fritillary is a kind of a past and it coin. sent14: something is not a kind of a ranching and it does not investigate invention if that it does not coin is not false. sent15: if the fact that the efflorescence is not optional and is linguistic does not hold then the fact that the keratinization is optional hold. sent16: the mahuang does not investigate barratry. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it investigates barratry and it is not non-arteriolar does not hold. sent18: that the mahuang investigates barratry and it is arteriolar is not right. sent19: if something is pupillary and is a kind of a ranching then it is not a kind of a cellulosic. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 -> int1: the mahuang is not pupillary if it does not investigate barratry and it is arteriolar.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the mahuang does not investigate barratry but it is arteriolar.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the mahuang is not pupillary.; sent1 -> int3: if the mahuang is not a ranching and/or it does investigate invention then it is pupillary.; sent8 -> int4: the mahuang either does not ranch or does investigate invention or both.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the mahuang is pupillary.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: that the mahuang does not investigate barratry but it is arteriolar is incorrect.; int7 -> int8: there exists something such that the fact that it does not investigate barratry and it is arteriolar is not correct.; __UNKNOWN__