premise: Two boys eat fruit on a couch.
hypothesis: Two boys are having a snack inside.
explanation_1: The boys eat fruit which implies that they are having a snack and they are on a coach so they must be inside.
premise_logic: exists e1 x1 x2 x3.(on(e1,x3) & n_couch(x3) & Theme(e1,x2) & Actor(e1,x1) & v_eat(e1) & n_fruit(x2) & n_boy(x1) & card_eq_2(x1))
hypothesis_logic: exists e1 x1 x2 x3.(Theme(e1,x2) & Actor(e1,x1) & v_have(e1) & n_inside(x2) & of(x2,x3) & n_snack(x3) & n_boy(x1) & card_eq_2(x1))
premise_sim: exists e1 x1 x2 x3.(v_eat(e1) & on(e1,x3) & n_fruit(x2) & n_couch(x3) & n_boy(x1) & card_eq_2(x1) & Theme(e1,x2) & Actor(e1,x1))
hypothesis_sim: exists e1 x1 x2 x3.(v_have(e1) & of(x2,x3) & n_snack(x3) & n_inside(x2) & n_boy(x1) & card_eq_2(x1) & Theme(e1,x2) & Actor(e1,x1))