that the interviewer does groove plastid and is not autoplastic is not correct.
sent1: if the botanist is not autoplastic then the fact that the interviewer does groove plastid and is autoplastic is not correct. sent2: if the nailfile is not a spinmeister the teff is a kind of a Shavian. sent3: the fact that the interviewer does groove plastid and is not autoplastic is incorrect if the botanist is not autoplastic. sent4: something is not a kind of a Artocarpus if that it is a Artocarpus and it does not sight pegboard is wrong. sent5: the appraiser is a kind of a Shavian if that the teff is a kind of a Shavian is not wrong. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a HUD and/or it is a rockers is not correct. sent7: if something is not a Artocarpus the fact that it is a kind of Sisyphean thing that is not a demyelination is not right. sent8: that the interviewer is not a kind of a bounder if the fact that the botanist is both not non-Sisyphean and not a demyelination is wrong hold. sent9: the fact that the botanist is autoplastic but it does not groove plastid does not hold. sent10: something that is Shavian is an inlet that does not groove Boyle. sent11: if the appraiser is a grubby it is a cellophane. sent12: either everything grooves spiritualism or it is not a spinmeister or both. sent13: the fact that the interviewer grooves plastid and it is autoplastic is not right. sent14: something is not a vindication if it is a kind of a cellophane. sent15: something is not a rockers. sent16: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a HUD and/or is a rockers does not hold. sent17: something grooves plastid and is non-autoplastic if it is not a bounder. sent18: there is something such that that it is not autoplastic and/or does groove plastid does not hold. sent19: if something is an inlet and does not groove Boyle it is a kind of a grubby. sent20: the fact that the teff is a kind of a Shavian if the nailfile grooves spiritualism is right. sent21: that the botanist does groove plastid and is not autoplastic does not hold.
the interviewer does groove plastid but it is not autoplastic.
sent17 -> int1: if the fact that the interviewer is not a bounder is right it grooves plastid and is not autoplastic.; sent7 -> int2: if that the botanist is not a Artocarpus is right then that it is Sisyphean and it is not a kind of a demyelination is not true.; sent4 -> int3: if the fact that that the botanist is a Artocarpus that does not sight pegboard is not true is not wrong the fact that it is not a Artocarpus hold.; sent14 -> int4: if the appraiser is a cellophane then it is not a vindication.; sent19 -> int5: the appraiser is a kind of a grubby if it is an inlet and does not groove Boyle.; sent10 -> int6: if the appraiser is a Shavian then it is an inlet and it does not groove Boyle.; sent12 -> int7: the nailfile grooves spiritualism or it is not a kind of a spinmeister or both.; int7 & sent20 & sent2 -> int8: that the teff is Shavian is correct.; sent5 & int8 -> int9: the appraiser is a kind of a Shavian.; int6 & int9 -> int10: the appraiser is an inlet but it does not groove Boyle.; int5 & int10 -> int11: the appraiser is a grubby.; sent11 & int11 -> int12: the appraiser is a cellophane.; int4 & int12 -> int13: the appraiser is not a vindication.; int13 -> int14: something is not a kind of a vindication.;
$hypothesis$ = that the interviewer does groove plastid and is not autoplastic is not correct. ; $context$ = sent1: if the botanist is not autoplastic then the fact that the interviewer does groove plastid and is autoplastic is not correct. sent2: if the nailfile is not a spinmeister the teff is a kind of a Shavian. sent3: the fact that the interviewer does groove plastid and is not autoplastic is incorrect if the botanist is not autoplastic. sent4: something is not a kind of a Artocarpus if that it is a Artocarpus and it does not sight pegboard is wrong. sent5: the appraiser is a kind of a Shavian if that the teff is a kind of a Shavian is not wrong. sent6: there exists something such that the fact that it is not a HUD and/or it is a rockers is not correct. sent7: if something is not a Artocarpus the fact that it is a kind of Sisyphean thing that is not a demyelination is not right. sent8: that the interviewer is not a kind of a bounder if the fact that the botanist is both not non-Sisyphean and not a demyelination is wrong hold. sent9: the fact that the botanist is autoplastic but it does not groove plastid does not hold. sent10: something that is Shavian is an inlet that does not groove Boyle. sent11: if the appraiser is a grubby it is a cellophane. sent12: either everything grooves spiritualism or it is not a spinmeister or both. sent13: the fact that the interviewer grooves plastid and it is autoplastic is not right. sent14: something is not a vindication if it is a kind of a cellophane. sent15: something is not a rockers. sent16: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a HUD and/or is a rockers does not hold. sent17: something grooves plastid and is non-autoplastic if it is not a bounder. sent18: there is something such that that it is not autoplastic and/or does groove plastid does not hold. sent19: if something is an inlet and does not groove Boyle it is a kind of a grubby. sent20: the fact that the teff is a kind of a Shavian if the nailfile grooves spiritualism is right. sent21: that the botanist does groove plastid and is not autoplastic does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__