the ox is prodromal.
sent1: if that the ox is not anemic is not wrong then that the hornpipe is not a kind of an animism and is not a kind of a code is incorrect. sent2: if the butterbean is indistinguishable the hornpipe is unconstitutional. sent3: that the ox is not prodromal is wrong if it is unconstitutional. sent4: the fact that the hornpipe is not a kind of a marmalade and it is not indistinguishable is not correct. sent5: that the garroter is not apoplectiform and not a marmalade is wrong if the butterbean is not unconstitutional. sent6: if the ox is unconstitutional then the butterbean is prodromal. sent7: the hornpipe is not unconstitutional. sent8: the fact that the garroter is not indistinguishable but it is apoplectiform is not true if the hornpipe is not a marmalade. sent9: the ox is a pomologist. sent10: if the hornpipe is not distinguishable then the ox is prodromal. sent11: the hackee is not virtuous and is not a kind of a code. sent12: the hornpipe is indistinguishable if it is a code. sent13: if the butterbean is a code then the hornpipe is unconstitutional. sent14: the garroter is not apoplectiform and is not a kind of a marmalade. sent15: the coon is unconstitutional. sent16: that the ox is a kind of non-prodromal a marmalade is not correct. sent17: the garroter does code. sent18: something is not prodromal if that it is not a code and is prodromal is not true. sent19: the authority is not unconstitutional and it is not onstage.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the butterbean is not unconstitutional.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the garroter is not apoplectiform and it is not a marmalade is not right.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the butterbean is unconstitutional.;
the ox is not prodromal.
sent18 -> int4: if the fact that the ox is not a code but it is prodromal is not correct it is not prodromal.;
$hypothesis$ = the ox is prodromal. ; $context$ = sent1: if that the ox is not anemic is not wrong then that the hornpipe is not a kind of an animism and is not a kind of a code is incorrect. sent2: if the butterbean is indistinguishable the hornpipe is unconstitutional. sent3: that the ox is not prodromal is wrong if it is unconstitutional. sent4: the fact that the hornpipe is not a kind of a marmalade and it is not indistinguishable is not correct. sent5: that the garroter is not apoplectiform and not a marmalade is wrong if the butterbean is not unconstitutional. sent6: if the ox is unconstitutional then the butterbean is prodromal. sent7: the hornpipe is not unconstitutional. sent8: the fact that the garroter is not indistinguishable but it is apoplectiform is not true if the hornpipe is not a marmalade. sent9: the ox is a pomologist. sent10: if the hornpipe is not distinguishable then the ox is prodromal. sent11: the hackee is not virtuous and is not a kind of a code. sent12: the hornpipe is indistinguishable if it is a code. sent13: if the butterbean is a code then the hornpipe is unconstitutional. sent14: the garroter is not apoplectiform and is not a kind of a marmalade. sent15: the coon is unconstitutional. sent16: that the ox is a kind of non-prodromal a marmalade is not correct. sent17: the garroter does code. sent18: something is not prodromal if that it is not a code and is prodromal is not true. sent19: the authority is not unconstitutional and it is not onstage. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the butterbean is not unconstitutional.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the garroter is not apoplectiform and it is not a marmalade is not right.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the butterbean is unconstitutional.; __UNKNOWN__