premise: A man with a coat is walking in front of a mural.
hypothesis: The man is running.
explanation_1: Sentence one gives more detail that the man has a coat, and states he is walking Sentence two does not describe the man and says, instead, he is running
premise_logic: exists e1 x1 x2 x3 x4.(in(e1,x3) & of(x3,x4) & n_mural(x4) & n_front(x3) & Actor(e1,x1) & v_walk(e1) & with(x1,x2) & n_coat(x2) & n_man(x1))
hypothesis_logic: exists e1 x1.(n_man(x1) & Actor(e1,x1) & v_run(e1))
premise_sim: exists e1 x1 x2 x3 x4.(with(x1,x2) & v_walk(e1) & of(x3,x4) & n_mural(x4) & n_man(x1) & n_front(x3) & n_coat(x2) & in(e1,x3) & Actor(e1,x1))
hypothesis_sim: exists e1 x1.(v_run(e1) & n_man(x1) & Actor(e1,x1))