premise
stringlengths 923
1.41k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 11
33
| label
stringclasses 4
values |
|---|---|---|
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Harlan is not brown. | entailment |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Hardy is brown. | contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Fred is guilty. | contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Harlan is embarrassed. | self_contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Harlan is brown. | contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Fred is not embarrassed. | self_contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Calvin is not naughty. | neutral |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Morris is not guilty. | entailment |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Percival is brown. | self_contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Stephen is popular. | entailment |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Calvin is not embarrassed. | neutral |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Fred is not naughty. | contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Harlan is not embarrassed. | self_contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Fred is not brown. | contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Calvin is brown. | neutral |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Percival is popular. | entailment |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Calvin is not brown. | neutral |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Harlan is untidy. | entailment |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Fred is embarrassed. | self_contradiction |
Morris is popular.
Morris is brown.
Harlan is guilty.
Stephen is popular.
Percival is not untidy.
Percival is not brown.
Harlan is embarrassed.
Hardy is not embarrassed.
Harlan is untidy.
Harlan is popular.
Morris is not guilty.
Stephen is naughty.If someone is popular and not guilty, then he is embarrassed and brown.
If someone is not untidy, then he is both not guilty and popular.
If there is someone who is not brown, then Fred is not embarrassed.
Someone being naughty is equivalent to being embarrassed.
Someone is popular and untidy if and only if he is not embarrassed.
If someone is guilty, then he is both not brown and not embarrassed.
Stephen being not untidy or Percival being not embarrassed implies that Harlan is not guilty.
If everyone is untidy or naughty, then Calvin is embarrassed.
If there is at least one people who is popular, then Fred is not guilty and Harlan is not brown.
Stephen being not popular and Hardy being untidy imply that Hardy is guilty.
Percival being embarrassed is equivalent to Hardy being guilty.
If there is at least one people who is embarrassed, then Morris is popular. | Hardy is naughty. | neutral |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Grant is steep. | self_contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Travis is steep. | contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Theobold is lonely. | neutral |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Shelley is not lonely. | neutral |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Theobold is lively. | entailment |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Claudia is ugly. | contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Claudia is not ugly. | entailment |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Rick is disobedient. | contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Rick is lively. | entailment |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Kent is not lively. | neutral |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Theobold is steep. | contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Travis is lively. | contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Theobold is not steep. | entailment |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Claudia is not timid. | neutral |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Grant is ugly. | self_contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Shelley is not ugly. | entailment |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Grant is not steep. | self_contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Rick is not lonely. | self_contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Grant is not ugly. | self_contradiction |
Grant is steep.
Travis is ugly.
Rick is lively.
Rick is lonely.
Claudia is not ugly.
Travis is not steep.
Grant is ugly.
Theobold is lively.
Theobold is not steep.
Travis is disobedient.
Travis is not lively.
Rick is not disobedient.If there is someone who is either not lively or timid, then Rick is not lonely.
If Claudia is not lonely and Rick is not ugly, then Theobold is lively.
If there is at least one people who is not timid, then Grant is not ugly.
If someone is both not lively and disobedient, then he is ugly.
Someone being both timid and not ugly is equivalent to being not lonely and not steep.
Someone being both not timid and disobedient is equivalent to being ugly and not lively.
Someone who is both timid and not steep is always ugly.
If there is at least one people who is either lively or timid, then Grant is not steep and Rick is not lonely.
If there is someone who is either lively or not disobedient, then Shelley is not ugly.
If there is someone who is timid, then Claudia is not ugly and Theobold is lonely.
Theobold being not timid or Rick being ugly implies that Theobold is not lonely.
If there is at least one people who is steep, then Rick is not lonely. | Kent is not ugly. | neutral |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Danna is miniscule. | entailment |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Katrina is not curious. | entailment |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Katrina is terrible. | self_contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Maribel is not miniscule. | contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Titus is exuberant. | self_contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Katrina is not terrible. | self_contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Danna is cool. | neutral |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Marcus is curious. | neutral |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Conroy is miniscule. | contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Danna is not miniscule. | contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Titus is curious. | contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Danna is not curious. | neutral |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Norman is not curious. | entailment |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Titus is not curious. | entailment |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Titus is not cool. | entailment |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Conroy is terrible. | neutral |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Titus is cool. | contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Titus is terrible. | self_contradiction |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Maribel is curious. | neutral |
Katrina is not terrible.
Conroy is not miniscule.
Titus is not terrible.
Maribel is miniscule.
Danna is miniscule.
Titus is not cool.
Titus is not curious.
Norman is not exuberant.
Katrina is not exuberant.
Katrina is not cool.
Norman is not few.
Titus is exuberant.If Danna is not terrible, then Maribel is not miniscule, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is both curious and miniscule, then Maribel is terrible.
As long as someone is not curious and not terrible, he is not cool and not exuberant.
If there is someone who is either not curious or terrible, then Norman is exuberant.
It can be concluded that Maribel is curious once knowing that Maribel is not miniscule or Danna is not terrible.
If someone is exuberant or he is not terrible, then he is not curious.
Someone being both not miniscule and not terrible is equivalent to being not few and curious.
It can be concluded that Conroy is not exuberant once knowing that Danna is not miniscule or Danna is few.
Someone is not cool if and only if he is terrible.
If there is someone who is either terrible or not cool, then Marcus is miniscule.
If someone is cool, then he is not exuberant.
If Marcus is miniscule, then Norman is not exuberant. | Norman is exuberant. | self_contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Alisa is miniscule. | contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Rodney is not sufficient. | neutral |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Marvin is miniscule. | self_contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Alisa is not sufficient. | entailment |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Gemma is not miniscule. | self_contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Brian is not miniscule. | contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Gemma is not nutty. | self_contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Brian is sufficient. | entailment |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Brian is miniscule. | entailment |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Marvin is strange. | neutral |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Gemma is not strange. | self_contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Rodney is not afraid. | entailment |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Rodney is sufficient. | neutral |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Gemma is sexual. | contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Alisa is sufficient. | contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Goddard is sufficient. | neutral |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Gemma is afraid. | self_contradiction |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Goddard is not sexual. | neutral |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Alisa is not strange. | entailment |
Brian is sufficient.
Rodney is not nutty.
Gemma is not strange.
Gemma is not nutty.
Marvin is sexual.
Charles is afraid.
Charles is not nutty.
Gemma is afraid.
Alisa is not miniscule.
Rodney is not afraid.
Gemma is not sufficient.
Marvin is miniscule.If Marvin is not sufficient and Rodney is strange, then Marvin is miniscule.
If there is nobody who is not not miniscule, then Gemma is not sufficient and Goddard is not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is sufficient or not strange, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is someone who is not nutty, then Brian is sexual and Marvin is not miniscule.
If someone is not strange, then he is not miniscule.
Someone is not strange and not sufficient if and only if he is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not miniscule and not sufficient, then Alisa is nutty.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Goddard is not nutty.
If someone is either sexual or strange, then he is miniscule and not afraid.
If there is at least one people who is both not sexual and not strange, then Alisa is not miniscule.
If there is someone who is sufficient, then Alisa is not miniscule.
Someone being both not miniscule and not nutty is equivalent to being not sexual and strange. | Brian is not sexual. | contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Cadman is not rational. | entailment |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Rupert is not informal. | neutral |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Rupert is sore. | neutral |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Cadman is psychological. | self_contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Rory is not rational. | contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Hannah is not better. | neutral |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Sterling is not sore. | entailment |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Sterling is not rational. | entailment |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Kyle is not outrageous. | contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Cadman is outrageous. | self_contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Kyle is rational. | entailment |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Cadman is not better. | entailment |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Kyle is not better. | neutral |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Hannah is sore. | neutral |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Sterling is not outrageous. | self_contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Kyle is not sore. | contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Kyle is not rational. | contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Rupert is not better. | contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Cadman is not psychological. | self_contradiction |
Brian is better.
Kyle is rational.
Kyle is psychological.
Brian is not psychological.
Kyle is sore.
Brian is informal.
Cadman is psychological.
Rory is outrageous.
Rupert is better.
Rory is rational.
Sterling is not better.
Cadman is not better.Someone is outrageous and not better if and only if he is not sore and not rational.
If there is at least one people who is both not outrageous and sore, then Hannah is not better.
It can be concluded that Rupert is not rational once knowing that Cadman is sore and Hannah is not better.
If someone is not better, then he is outrageous.
Someone who is not psychological is always not sore.
If there is at least one people who is not sore or informal, then Rory is not psychological.
It can be concluded that Brian is not rational and Sterling is better once knowing that Cadman is sore.
It can be concluded that Sterling is not better and Sterling is informal once knowing that Sterling is rational.
If there is at least one people who is sore or better, then Cadman is not rational.
Someone being both not psychological and not outrageous is equivalent to being not better and not sore.
Someone who is eithor psychological or sore is always outrageous.
If all people are not outrageous or psychological, then Cadman is not informal. | Sterling is outrageous. | self_contradiction |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.