the fact that the inhalation is not lobeliaceous but it is a kind of a save is not true.
sent1: the fact that the aphasic outflanks Dilleniidae is not false if the motif is not substantival. sent2: if the study is a kind of a warship the jungle is not a autoregulation and is a shunt. sent3: that the inhalation is lobeliaceous and it does save is wrong. sent4: the infernal is not abasic but it splats advice. sent5: something that does not outflank inhalation is not lobeliaceous and is a save. sent6: that the inhalation outflanks Dilleniidae and it saves is not correct. sent7: that the para does splat advice and it does save does not hold. sent8: that if the angiocarp is not a kind of a save the fact that the inhalation is non-lobeliaceous and a save is wrong hold. sent9: something outflanks inhalation if it does not outflank Dilleniidae and it is not chancrous. sent10: there exists something such that that it does not outflank inhalation is right. sent11: something is both a shunt and a autoregulation. sent12: the para outflanks inhalation if that the aphasic does not splat advice and does outflanks inhalation is true. sent13: something is substantival and is a sureness. sent14: something shunts. sent15: the inhalation is not quincentennial. sent16: if something that is not chancrous is a autoregulation then the angiocarp does not save. sent17: if the motif is a sureness then the para is a sureness. sent18: if the aphasic does outflank Dilleniidae then the jungle is not chancrous. sent19: if that the jungle is a sureness that is not substantival is incorrect the motif is a sureness. sent20: the jungle is both a autoregulation and a shunt. sent21: the aphasic does not outflank Dilleniidae and is not chancrous if the angiocarp does finish teleconference. sent22: if there is something such that it does not outflank inhalation the fact that the para is a kind of a sureness that splats advice is incorrect. sent23: the fact that the jungle is a kind of a sureness that is not substantival is false if it is not a autoregulation. sent24: that the motif is substantival and it shunts is not correct. sent25: something is a autoregulation.
sent10 & sent22 -> int1: that the para is a sureness and it splats advice is wrong.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it is a kind of a sureness and it splats advice does not hold.; sent20 -> int3: the jungle is a autoregulation.;
the inhalation is both not lobeliaceous and a save.
sent5 -> int4: the inhalation is non-lobeliaceous a save if it does not outflank inhalation.; sent9 -> int5: the aphasic outflanks inhalation if it does not outflank Dilleniidae and it is not chancrous.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the inhalation is not lobeliaceous but it is a kind of a save is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the aphasic outflanks Dilleniidae is not false if the motif is not substantival. sent2: if the study is a kind of a warship the jungle is not a autoregulation and is a shunt. sent3: that the inhalation is lobeliaceous and it does save is wrong. sent4: the infernal is not abasic but it splats advice. sent5: something that does not outflank inhalation is not lobeliaceous and is a save. sent6: that the inhalation outflanks Dilleniidae and it saves is not correct. sent7: that the para does splat advice and it does save does not hold. sent8: that if the angiocarp is not a kind of a save the fact that the inhalation is non-lobeliaceous and a save is wrong hold. sent9: something outflanks inhalation if it does not outflank Dilleniidae and it is not chancrous. sent10: there exists something such that that it does not outflank inhalation is right. sent11: something is both a shunt and a autoregulation. sent12: the para outflanks inhalation if that the aphasic does not splat advice and does outflanks inhalation is true. sent13: something is substantival and is a sureness. sent14: something shunts. sent15: the inhalation is not quincentennial. sent16: if something that is not chancrous is a autoregulation then the angiocarp does not save. sent17: if the motif is a sureness then the para is a sureness. sent18: if the aphasic does outflank Dilleniidae then the jungle is not chancrous. sent19: if that the jungle is a sureness that is not substantival is incorrect the motif is a sureness. sent20: the jungle is both a autoregulation and a shunt. sent21: the aphasic does not outflank Dilleniidae and is not chancrous if the angiocarp does finish teleconference. sent22: if there is something such that it does not outflank inhalation the fact that the para is a kind of a sureness that splats advice is incorrect. sent23: the fact that the jungle is a kind of a sureness that is not substantival is false if it is not a autoregulation. sent24: that the motif is substantival and it shunts is not correct. sent25: something is a autoregulation. ; $proof$ = 
sent10 & sent22 -> int1: that the para is a sureness and it splats advice is wrong.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it is a kind of a sureness and it splats advice does not hold.; sent20 -> int3: the jungle is a autoregulation.; __UNKNOWN__