premise
stringlengths 923
1.41k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 11
33
| label
stringclasses 4
values |
|---|---|---|
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Hamlin is reserved. | contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Quillan is not crazy. | entailment |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Reginald is cheeky. | self_contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Reginald is lonely. | self_contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Quillan is not cheeky. | entailment |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Reginald is healthy. | entailment |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Ryan is crazy. | entailment |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Chandler is not smart. | neutral |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Tobias is cheeky. | contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Neil is not crazy. | neutral |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Quillan is reserved. | neutral |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Tobias is not smart. | self_contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Reginald is not cheeky. | self_contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Quillan is not smart. | entailment |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Neil is not lonely. | neutral |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Chandler is lonely. | neutral |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Reginald is not healthy. | contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Tobias is smart. | self_contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Chandler is not cheeky. | contradiction |
Tobias is not crazy.
Reginald is healthy.
Tobias is smart.
Quillan is not crazy.
Reginald is lonely.
Ryan is reserved.
Ryan is crazy.
Reginald is cheeky.
Tobias is not cheeky.
Neil is reserved.
Hamlin is crazy.
Ryan is lonely.If Hamlin is not crazy and Quillan is smart, then Hamlin is not healthy.
If there is someone who is not crazy, then Quillan is not cheeky and Reginald is not lonely.
If Hamlin is not smart or Chandler is healthy, then Hamlin is not cheeky.
If someone is not reserved or lonely, then he is not cheeky.
If Hamlin is crazy, then Neil is not smart and Chandler is healthy, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not smart or not healthy, then Hamlin is not reserved.
It can be concluded that Quillan is not smart once knowing that Quillan is reserved.
If Tobias is smart and Neil is cheeky, then Chandler is lonely.
If there is at least one people who is both not lonely and smart, then Chandler is crazy.
As long as someone is not cheeky, he is not smart and lonely.
Someone being cheeky is equivalent to being healthy.
If there is at least one people who is not lonely, then Hamlin is not reserved. | Hamlin is not crazy. | contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Alton is not thankful. | contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Sidney is not weak. | neutral |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Joshua is not frantic. | self_contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Kingsley is not defeated. | entailment |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Kingsley is not thankful. | self_contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Alton is not frantic. | self_contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Alton is frantic. | self_contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Alton is not brown. | contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Joshua is defeated. | neutral |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Melody is defeated. | contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Kingsley is not brown. | entailment |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Kingsley is frantic. | neutral |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Gideon is famous. | neutral |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Sidney is not brown. | neutral |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Joshua is frantic. | self_contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Gideon is defeated. | contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Melody is not brown. | contradiction |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Alton is thankful. | entailment |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Melody is frantic. | entailment |
Kingsley is not weak.
Alton is not frantic.
Kingsley is not thankful.
Kingsley is not defeated.
Joshua is frantic.
Joshua is not thankful.
Alton is thankful.
Melody is not defeated.
Melody is not famous.
Gideon is not defeated.
Joshua is not famous.
Sidney is not thankful.If Ross is not weak or Melody is thankful, then Ross is not frantic.
If there is someone who is not weak, then Joshua is not frantic.
If Melody is not frantic or Kingsley is not famous, then Ross is not thankful.
It can be concluded that Melody is frantic and Alton is famous once knowing that Gideon is not weak.
Sidney being not famous implies that Joshua is brown and Gideon is frantic.
If there is at least one people who is both not weak and not defeated, then Alton is not famous.
If someone is not weak, then he is both thankful and not brown.
Gideon is famous if and only if Gideon is thankful.
If someone is not famous, then he is brown.
Kingsley being not thankful and Gideon being not frantic imply that Joshua is not weak.
If someone is not famous, then he is frantic.
If Gideon is not thankful, then Sidney is defeated. | Joshua is not thankful. | entailment |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Cuthbert is not untidy. | neutral |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Addison is not good. | contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Addison is comprehensive. | self_contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Roy is not untidy. | entailment |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Roy is naughty. | contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Cuthbert is not easy. | neutral |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Griswald is not naughty. | neutral |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Addison is not naughty. | neutral |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Melody is untidy. | contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Isabel is difficult. | entailment |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Griswald is not good. | self_contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Griswald is easy. | entailment |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Gemma is not good. | self_contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Isabel is not easy. | contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Gemma is not comprehensive. | entailment |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Gemma is not easy. | contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Cuthbert is comprehensive. | neutral |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Gemma is good. | self_contradiction |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Gemma is not naughty. | entailment |
Griswald is easy.
Isabel is difficult.
Addison is not untidy.
Gemma is not good.
Roy is not naughty.
Griswald is not untidy.
Melody is not naughty.
Addison is comprehensive.
Griswald is not good.
Isabel is good.
Addison is easy.
Isabel is easy.Addison being not easy implies that Cuthbert is not difficult.
If someone is not difficult and not comprehensive, then he is both not untidy and easy, and vice versa.
Someone who is not good is always both not comprehensive and easy.
Roy being not good or Isabel being not comprehensive implies that Isabel is difficult.
Roy being not good is equivalent to Melody being untidy and Gemma being not difficult.
If there is someone who is difficult, then Melody is not untidy and Gemma is not naughty.
If there is at least one people who is untidy, then Gemma is difficult and Gemma is comprehensive.
Cuthbert being not naughty or Isabel being comprehensive implies that Addison is not difficult.
Gemma being not comprehensive or Gemma being untidy implies that Gemma is easy.
All not comprehensive people are good.
It can be concluded that Addison is comprehensive and Roy is not untidy once knowing that Gemma is easy.
All not difficult people are easy. | Griswald is good. | self_contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Stefan is helpful. | entailment |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Isaac is not light. | neutral |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Calvert is exciting. | neutral |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Otis is not light. | self_contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Gale is helpful. | contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Stefan is not horrible. | self_contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Johnny is not horrible. | entailment |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Johnny is helpful. | entailment |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Isaac is helpful. | contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Arthur is not rational. | neutral |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Gale is beautiful. | contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Stefan is beautiful. | neutral |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Johnny is not light. | self_contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Gale is not beautiful. | entailment |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Isaac is not rational. | neutral |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Johnny is not exciting. | contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Calvert is not horrible. | entailment |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Stefan is horrible. | self_contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Otis is not beautiful. | self_contradiction |
Otis is not light.
Otis is rational.
Stefan is helpful.
Stefan is light.
Gale is not horrible.
Gale is not helpful.
Calvert is not beautiful.
Calvert is not rational.
Arthur is light.
Johnny is not light.
Stefan is not horrible.
Gale is rational.Someone who is both exciting and not beautiful is always not horrible.
Someone who is not horrible is always light.
If there is someone who is both not exciting and helpful, then Gale is rational.
Isaac being not helpful implies that Johnny is not horrible.
If Gale is rational, then Isaac is not helpful, and vice versa.
If there is at least one people who is not light or beautiful, then Calvert is not horrible.
If someone is exciting or he is rational, then he is not horrible.
Someone who is rational is always not beautiful.
If there is someone who is helpful, then Isaac is horrible and Johnny is exciting.
Johnny being beautiful is equivalent to Calvert being not helpful and Stefan being horrible.
If someone is not horrible and not light, then he is both beautiful and helpful, and vice versa.
If Johnny is not light and Otis is horrible, then Isaac is not exciting and Calvert is rational, and vice versa. | Calvert is rational. | contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Adrian is not generous. | contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Morris is massive. | neutral |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Hubert is not ancient. | self_contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Morris is plastic. | neutral |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Bert is generous. | entailment |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Morris is not oak. | self_contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Scott is generous. | neutral |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Goddard is generous. | entailment |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Bert is ancient. | neutral |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Goddard is not mad. | contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Goddard is not plastic. | self_contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Goddard is plastic. | self_contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Hubert is mad. | contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Bert is not oak. | self_contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Hubert is not plastic. | entailment |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Bert is not plastic. | contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Bert is not generous. | contradiction |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Hubert is generous. | neutral |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Hubert is oak. | entailment |
Goddard is not plastic.
Hubert is oak.
Hubert is ancient.
Morris is not oak.
Hunter is ancient.
Goddard is mad.
Hunter is oak.
Bert is not oak.
Hunter is not massive.
Hubert is not plastic.
Hunter is plastic.
Adrian is mad.If someone is generous, then he is plastic.
If someone is mad, then he is generous, and vice versa.
If there is someone who is mad, then Hubert is massive and Morris is not ancient.
Goddard being not mad and Hunter being oak imply that Hunter is not plastic.
Someone who is eithor ancient or not oak is always not mad.
Morris being mad is equivalent to Goddard being not massive.
As long as someone is not massive, he is not mad and not generous.
Someone who is not mad is always oak.
If there is at least one people who is both oak and massive, then Hubert is not ancient.
As long as someone is either not massive or not generous, he is plastic and mad.
If there is someone who is massive, then Bert is mad.
If Adrian is ancient, then Adrian is not mad, and vice versa. | Hubert is not mad. | entailment |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.