premise: a snowboarder wearing a green hat is riding along a metal railing.
hypothesis: A man is riding a riding a bicycle through the park.
explanation_1: A snowboarder does not ride a bicycle.
explanation_2: The subject cannot ride through the park and along a metal railing at once.
explanation_3: The snowboarder in the first sentence is riding a metal railing and the man in the second sentence is riding a bicycle.
premise_logic: exists e2 e1 s1 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5.(along(e2,x4) & n_railing(x4) & of(x4,x5) & n_metal(x5) & Actor(e2,x1) & v_ride(e2) & Theme(e1,x3) & Actor(e1,x2) & v_wear(e1) & n_hat(x3) & a_green(s1) & Theme(s1,x3) & (x1 = x2) & n_snowboarder(x1))
hypothesis_logic: exists e1 p1 x1 x2 x4.(n_park(x4) & exists e2 x3.(through(e2,x4) & Theme(e2,x3) & Actor(e2,x2) & v_ride(e2) & n_bicycle(x3)) & Recipient(e1,p1) & Actor(e1,x1) & Topic(e1,x2) & v_ride(e1) & n_a(x2) & n_man(x1))