premise
stringlengths 923
1.41k
| hypothesis
stringlengths 11
33
| label
stringclasses 4
values |
|---|---|---|
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Lester is romantic. | entailment |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Lester is worried. | neutral |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Shamus is romantic. | entailment |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Coleman is worried. | neutral |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Konrad is not happy. | self_contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Konrad is not plastic. | entailment |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Konrad is happy. | self_contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Morris is happy. | neutral |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Coleman is romantic. | contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Gemma is not romantic. | neutral |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Gilbert is not romantic. | self_contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Gilbert is happy. | self_contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Morris is worried. | contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Gemma is not plastic. | entailment |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Shamus is helpful. | neutral |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Gemma is not worried. | contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Shamus is not romantic. | contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Coleman is plastic. | entailment |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Gilbert is worried. | contradiction |
Lester is not plastic.
Lester is not happy.
Konrad is not happy.
Gilbert is not worried.
Konrad is not plastic.
Shamus is romantic.
Morris is not romantic.
Morris is not worried.
Coleman is not romantic.
Gemma is not plastic.
Morris is disobedient.
Gilbert is romantic.If there is at least one people who is either helpful or worried, then Morris is not romantic and Shamus is plastic.
Lester being romantic is equivalent to Gilbert being not happy and Gemma being not plastic.
If there is at least one people who is not happy or worried, then Gilbert is not romantic.
Gemma being romantic and Coleman being not plastic imply that Shamus is not happy.
Gemma is worried if and only if Lester is romantic.
If there is at least one people who is helpful, then Morris is not romantic and Coleman is plastic.
If there is at least one people who is both worried and not plastic, then Gemma is not happy.
Someone being happy is equivalent to being not disobedient.
If there is at least one people who is happy, then Coleman is plastic.
Someone who is eithor not helpful or not plastic is always disobedient.
Someone being both not disobedient and romantic is equivalent to being not happy.
Shamus being worried is equivalent to Shamus being not romantic. | Konrad is disobedient. | self_contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Scott is not ancient. | entailment |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Ethan is not uninterested. | contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Angelique is confident. | contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Angelique is uninterested. | self_contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Monique is not selfish. | self_contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Chrysta is not selfish. | neutral |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Bryant is confident. | neutral |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Monique is selfish. | self_contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Angelique is not selfish. | self_contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Scott is selfish. | self_contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Scott is not emotional. | neutral |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Monique is emotional. | contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Chrysta is selfish. | neutral |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Traci is brown. | contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Monique is not confident. | contradiction |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Ethan is uninterested. | entailment |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Ethan is brown. | entailment |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Angelique is not emotional. | entailment |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Monique is confident. | entailment |
Angelique is not confident.
Monique is not selfish.
Monique is confident.
Ethan is ancient.
Monique is not ancient.
Chrysta is not confident.
Ethan is brown.
Scott is selfish.
Scott is uninterested.
Ethan is selfish.
Angelique is not emotional.
Monique is not emotional.If there is someone who is either confident or emotional, then Angelique is not selfish.
Traci is confident if and only if Monique is emotional and Chrysta is ancient.
If someone is confident or he is not ancient, then he is uninterested.
Someone being not uninterested is equivalent to being not confident.
If Ethan is not uninterested, then Monique is not emotional.
If there is someone who is either not uninterested or ancient, then Traci is not brown.
If Bryant is not brown and Angelique is not selfish, then Scott is ancient.
If someone is not confident and not emotional, then he is not selfish and not ancient.
Someone who is both confident and not brown is always not ancient.
If there is at least one people who is not brown or not emotional, then Chrysta is not confident.
If someone is either uninterested or brown, then he is not ancient and selfish.
If someone is uninterested, then he is not selfish, and vice versa. | Ethan is emotional. | neutral |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Gilbert is difficult. | contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Brooke is ugliest. | self_contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Sandy is cotton. | self_contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Gilbert is sexual. | contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Gilbert is not ugliest. | neutral |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Carlton is entire. | neutral |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Garth is entire. | entailment |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Kianna is ugliest. | neutral |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Carlton is every. | neutral |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Garth is not ugliest. | entailment |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Garth is not difficult. | contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Carlton is cotton. | contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Kianna is cotton. | entailment |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Joshua is not every. | self_contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Joshua is difficult. | entailment |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Joshua is not difficult. | contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Carlton is not every. | neutral |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Sandy is not cotton. | self_contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Kianna is difficult. | self_contradiction |
Garth is not every.
Garth is difficult.
Carlton is ugliest.
Gilbert is not sexual.
Joshua is every.
Kianna is cotton.
Sandy is not cotton.
Garth is not sexual.
Brooke is cotton.
Sandy is every.
Brooke is every.
Kianna is difficult.If someone is ugliest, then he is both not cotton and sexual.
If someone who is entire is also every, then he is not ugliest.
It can be concluded that Brooke is not ugliest and Garth is entire once knowing that Sandy is not every.
If there is at least one people who is either ugliest or not entire, then Joshua is every and Gilbert is cotton.
If all people are ugliest, then Carlton is not cotton and Carlton is entire.
If there is someone who is either every or not entire, then Gilbert is not difficult.
Carlton is not every if and only if Sandy is not entire and Joshua is ugliest.
If someone is every, then he is difficult, and vice versa.
Someone who is both not cotton and not every is always entire.
Someone is not every if and only if he is difficult.
If Brooke is not every, then Sandy is sexual and Kianna is not difficult.
If there is at least one people who is every, then Brooke is ugliest and Sandy is cotton. | Brooke is entire. | entailment |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Olaf is not hungry. | entailment |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Halden is not confident. | entailment |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Halden is not successful. | entailment |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Kerwin is scary. | contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Ramsey is cloudy. | entailment |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Isaiah is confident. | self_contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Halden is not cloudy. | contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Brian is not brave. | neutral |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Kerwin is hungry. | neutral |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Brian is not hungry. | entailment |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Ramsey is successful. | contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Brian is not successful. | neutral |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Isaiah is not scary. | self_contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Halden is not scary. | neutral |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Halden is scary. | neutral |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Kerwin is confident. | contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Albern is not scary. | self_contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Albern is scary. | self_contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Olaf is not cloudy. | self_contradiction |
Isaiah is not scary.
Brian is not hungry.
Albern is not scary.
Halden is brave.
Ramsey is not successful.
Albern is not cloudy.
Halden is cloudy.
Albern is brave.
Isaiah is not brave.
Kerwin is not confident.
Isaiah is not confident.
Olaf is confident.If someone is scary and hungry, then he is both not cloudy and successful, and vice versa.
Someone who is brave is always not confident.
If someone who is not scary is also successful, then he is brave.
Someone being scary is equivalent to being not hungry.
All hungry people are not scary.
If there is someone who is either not brave or successful, then Olaf is cloudy.
Isaiah being confident and Isaiah being not cloudy are equivalent to Isaiah being not brave and Albern being not scary.
If there is at least one people who is not successful, then Albern is not hungry.
Someone who is confident is always both scary and not cloudy.
Someone being not successful is equivalent to being cloudy.
It can be concluded that Kerwin is not scary once knowing that Isaiah is not cloudy or Kerwin is not hungry.
Albern is confident if and only if Halden is successful and Ramsey is cloudy. | Albern is not brave. | contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Richard is vivacious. | entailment |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Olaf is not careless. | neutral |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Amos is not mad. | neutral |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Olaf is vivacious. | contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Alexis is not careless. | contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Alexis is not impressive. | entailment |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Richard is disobedient. | entailment |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Baird is not impressive. | contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Olaf is mad. | self_contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Everett is dangerous. | entailment |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Alexis is not mad. | self_contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Olaf is disobedient. | entailment |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Baird is not mad. | self_contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Eunice is not mad. | self_contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Amos is not vivacious. | neutral |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Baird is dangerous. | neutral |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Richard is dangerous. | contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Baird is not vivacious. | contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Richard is not mad. | self_contradiction |
Everett is not careless.
Alexis is dangerous.
Alexis is mad.
Baird is careless.
Richard is disobedient.
Richard is vivacious.
Everett is dangerous.
Alexis is not impressive.
Baird is impressive.
Olaf is disobedient.
Baird is mad.
Olaf is not mad.Someone being both mad and vivacious is equivalent to being careless.
Alexis being not disobedient is equivalent to Everett being careless and Amos being vivacious.
Someone is not impressive and vivacious if and only if he is mad and dangerous.
Someone who is not vivacious or disobedient is always mad and not dangerous.
Amos being not vivacious is equivalent to Amos being impressive and Olaf being careless.
If there is at least one people who is not impressive, then Olaf is not vivacious and Baird is not careless.
If Eunice is vivacious, then Baird is not careless and Baird is not dangerous.
Baird being disobedient and Everett being vivacious imply that Alexis is careless.
If there is someone who is both mad and impressive, then Everett is not careless.
If someone is vivacious or he is not dangerous, then he is not mad.
If there is at least one people who is both dangerous and not vivacious, then Amos is mad.
If Amos is not careless or Olaf is not vivacious, then Eunice is disobedient. | Olaf is not impressive. | neutral |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.