the volcano is a kind of a Pelagius.
sent1: if the quinidine is not unhappy and not noninstitutional then the volcano is a kind of a Pelagius. sent2: the fact that the undergarment is not a kind of a Desmanthus and/or is not pemphigous is not true if the investment is not a multiple. sent3: the territory is interlocutory if it is a kind of a imperfectibility. sent4: if something is not a hobnail it is not unhappy and is institutional. sent5: if something is interlocutory it detonates. sent6: if the territory trickles the quinidine is not a hobnail. sent7: the investment is not a multiple. sent8: something does trickle if it does detonate. sent9: the undergarment is a Desmanthus. sent10: if the fact that the undergarment either is a Desmanthus or is not pemphigous or both does not hold then the territory is a imperfectibility. sent11: that the volcano is a Pelagius is correct if the quinidine is unhappy and it is institutional. sent12: that the quinidine is not unhappy is not wrong. sent13: the territory is a kind of a imperfectibility if that the undergarment is not a Desmanthus and/or is not pemphigous is not correct.
sent2 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that either the undergarment is not a Desmanthus or it is not pemphigous or both is false.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the territory is a kind of a imperfectibility.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the fact that the territory is interlocutory is correct.; sent5 -> int4: if that the territory is interlocutory is right it does detonate.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the territory does detonate.; sent8 -> int6: the territory trickles if it does detonate.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the territory does trickle.; int7 & sent6 -> int8: the quinidine is not a hobnail.; sent4 -> int9: the quinidine is not unhappy and is institutional if it is not a hobnail.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the quinidine is euphoric thing that is institutional.; int10 & sent1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the volcano is a kind of a Pelagius. ; $context$ = sent1: if the quinidine is not unhappy and not noninstitutional then the volcano is a kind of a Pelagius. sent2: the fact that the undergarment is not a kind of a Desmanthus and/or is not pemphigous is not true if the investment is not a multiple. sent3: the territory is interlocutory if it is a kind of a imperfectibility. sent4: if something is not a hobnail it is not unhappy and is institutional. sent5: if something is interlocutory it detonates. sent6: if the territory trickles the quinidine is not a hobnail. sent7: the investment is not a multiple. sent8: something does trickle if it does detonate. sent9: the undergarment is a Desmanthus. sent10: if the fact that the undergarment either is a Desmanthus or is not pemphigous or both does not hold then the territory is a imperfectibility. sent11: that the volcano is a Pelagius is correct if the quinidine is unhappy and it is institutional. sent12: that the quinidine is not unhappy is not wrong. sent13: the territory is a kind of a imperfectibility if that the undergarment is not a Desmanthus and/or is not pemphigous is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 & sent7 -> int1: the fact that either the undergarment is not a Desmanthus or it is not pemphigous or both is false.; int1 & sent13 -> int2: the territory is a kind of a imperfectibility.; int2 & sent3 -> int3: the fact that the territory is interlocutory is correct.; sent5 -> int4: if that the territory is interlocutory is right it does detonate.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the territory does detonate.; sent8 -> int6: the territory trickles if it does detonate.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the territory does trickle.; int7 & sent6 -> int8: the quinidine is not a hobnail.; sent4 -> int9: the quinidine is not unhappy and is institutional if it is not a hobnail.; int8 & int9 -> int10: the quinidine is euphoric thing that is institutional.; int10 & sent1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__