the pupil is not abundant.
sent1: if the moonbeam tills then the pupil is abundant. sent2: that the popover is a kind of a debate that is not bottom-up is false. sent3: the moonbeam is not a tilled. sent4: the Stuart is calyceal and/or it is not gaseous if something is not immiscible. sent5: the popover is a kind of nonlinguistic thing that does prepare bunion. sent6: the Dane is not immiscible if there exists something such that the fact that that it is immiscible and is efficacious is not incorrect is not true. sent7: if something does till the fact that it is not an outrider and it does not scissor quaffer is wrong. sent8: if the relative is not a anxiolytic and does not prepare bunion the popover is a kind of a anxiolytic. sent9: that the relative is a kind of non-anxiolytic thing that does not prepare bunion is correct if the greenshank is not nonlinguistic. sent10: the pupil dabs Tsimshian if it is not a dissoluteness and it is not bottom-up. sent11: if the Stuart is calyceal the quaffer is not centrifugal. sent12: if something dabs Tsimshian and is anxiolytic then it is not abundant. sent13: something is not a dissoluteness if the fact that it does not prepare bunion and is linguistic is not true. sent14: something tills if it is bottom-up. sent15: the fact that something is not bottom-up and does not till does not hold if it is not a kind of a dissoluteness. sent16: the fact that the popover is not abundant is not incorrect if it is nonlinguistic and prepares bunion. sent17: if the Stuart is not gaseous then the quaffer is not centrifugal. sent18: the pupil is anxiolytic if the relative is a anxiolytic. sent19: the relative is a kind of a anxiolytic. sent20: if the popover dabs Tsimshian or it is a kind of a dissoluteness or both that the moonbeam is not a dissoluteness is true. sent21: the fact that the pupil prepares bunion and is not nonlinguistic is incorrect. sent22: that the popover is both a debate and unostentatious is not true if the moonbeam is not a tilled. sent23: something is not nonlinguistic if it is a kind of a singles. sent24: if there is something such that the fact that it does debate and is unostentatious is not true the pupil is not bottom-up. sent25: there exists something such that that it is immiscible and is not inefficacious is incorrect. sent26: that the fingertip does till is not wrong if the fact that the moonbeam is non-bottom-up thing that does not till is not correct. sent27: the fact that the pupil does not prepare bunion and is not nonlinguistic does not hold.
sent22 & sent3 -> int1: that the popover is a kind of a debate and it is unostentatious is false.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a debate that is unostentatious is not true.; int2 & sent24 -> int3: the pupil is not bottom-up.; sent13 -> int4: if the fact that the pupil does not prepare bunion and is not nonlinguistic does not hold then it is not a kind of a dissoluteness.; int4 & sent27 -> int5: the pupil is not a dissoluteness.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the pupil is not a dissoluteness and is not bottom-up.; int6 & sent10 -> int7: the pupil dabs Tsimshian.; sent18 & sent19 -> int8: the pupil is a anxiolytic.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the pupil dabs Tsimshian and it is a anxiolytic.; sent12 -> int10: if the pupil dabs Tsimshian and is anxiolytic then it is not abundant.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis;
the pupil is abundant.
sent14 -> int11: the moonbeam is a kind of a tilled if the fact that it is bottom-up is true.; sent23 -> int12: the greenshank is not nonlinguistic if it does single.; sent25 & sent6 -> int13: the Dane is not immiscible.; int13 -> int14: there are non-immiscible things.; int14 & sent4 -> int15: either the Stuart is calyceal or it is non-gaseous or both.; int15 & sent11 & sent17 -> int16: the quaffer is not centrifugal.; int16 -> int17: there exists something such that the fact that it is not centrifugal is correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the pupil is not abundant. ; $context$ = sent1: if the moonbeam tills then the pupil is abundant. sent2: that the popover is a kind of a debate that is not bottom-up is false. sent3: the moonbeam is not a tilled. sent4: the Stuart is calyceal and/or it is not gaseous if something is not immiscible. sent5: the popover is a kind of nonlinguistic thing that does prepare bunion. sent6: the Dane is not immiscible if there exists something such that the fact that that it is immiscible and is efficacious is not incorrect is not true. sent7: if something does till the fact that it is not an outrider and it does not scissor quaffer is wrong. sent8: if the relative is not a anxiolytic and does not prepare bunion the popover is a kind of a anxiolytic. sent9: that the relative is a kind of non-anxiolytic thing that does not prepare bunion is correct if the greenshank is not nonlinguistic. sent10: the pupil dabs Tsimshian if it is not a dissoluteness and it is not bottom-up. sent11: if the Stuart is calyceal the quaffer is not centrifugal. sent12: if something dabs Tsimshian and is anxiolytic then it is not abundant. sent13: something is not a dissoluteness if the fact that it does not prepare bunion and is linguistic is not true. sent14: something tills if it is bottom-up. sent15: the fact that something is not bottom-up and does not till does not hold if it is not a kind of a dissoluteness. sent16: the fact that the popover is not abundant is not incorrect if it is nonlinguistic and prepares bunion. sent17: if the Stuart is not gaseous then the quaffer is not centrifugal. sent18: the pupil is anxiolytic if the relative is a anxiolytic. sent19: the relative is a kind of a anxiolytic. sent20: if the popover dabs Tsimshian or it is a kind of a dissoluteness or both that the moonbeam is not a dissoluteness is true. sent21: the fact that the pupil prepares bunion and is not nonlinguistic is incorrect. sent22: that the popover is both a debate and unostentatious is not true if the moonbeam is not a tilled. sent23: something is not nonlinguistic if it is a kind of a singles. sent24: if there is something such that the fact that it does debate and is unostentatious is not true the pupil is not bottom-up. sent25: there exists something such that that it is immiscible and is not inefficacious is incorrect. sent26: that the fingertip does till is not wrong if the fact that the moonbeam is non-bottom-up thing that does not till is not correct. sent27: the fact that the pupil does not prepare bunion and is not nonlinguistic does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
sent22 & sent3 -> int1: that the popover is a kind of a debate and it is unostentatious is false.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a debate that is unostentatious is not true.; int2 & sent24 -> int3: the pupil is not bottom-up.; sent13 -> int4: if the fact that the pupil does not prepare bunion and is not nonlinguistic does not hold then it is not a kind of a dissoluteness.; int4 & sent27 -> int5: the pupil is not a dissoluteness.; int3 & int5 -> int6: the pupil is not a dissoluteness and is not bottom-up.; int6 & sent10 -> int7: the pupil dabs Tsimshian.; sent18 & sent19 -> int8: the pupil is a anxiolytic.; int7 & int8 -> int9: the pupil dabs Tsimshian and it is a anxiolytic.; sent12 -> int10: if the pupil dabs Tsimshian and is anxiolytic then it is not abundant.; int9 & int10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__