premise: The center horse has a white spot on his in the middle of his head.
hypothesis: The horse doesn't have any spots.
explanation_1: The pieces of information that totally contradict each other is mention of horse having no spots in second sentence as against the horse having a white spot on head in the first sentence.
premise_logic: exists e1 s1 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6.(n_head(x6) & of(x6,x5) & n_male(x5) & n_middle(x5) & n_horse(x1) & of(x1,x2) & n_center(x2) & in(e1,x5) & of(x5,x6) & Theme(e1,x3) & Actor(e1,x1) & v_have(e1) & on(x3,x4) & n_his(x4) & n_spot(x3) & a_white(s1) & Theme(s1,x3))
hypothesis_logic: exists x1.(n_horse(x1) & -all x2.(n_spot(x2) -> exists e1.(Theme(e1,x2) & Actor(e1,x1) & v_have(e1))))
premise_sim: exists e1 s1 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6.(v_have(e1) & on(x3,x4) & of(x6,x5) & of(x5,x6) & of(x1,x2) & n_spot(x3) & n_middle(x5) & n_male(x5) & n_horse(x1) & n_his(x4) & n_head(x6) & n_center(x2) & in(e1,x5) & a_white(s1) & Theme(s1,x3) & Theme(e1,x3) & Actor(e1,x1))
hypothesis_sim: exists x1.(n_horse(x1) & exists x2.(n_spot(x2) & all e1.(-v_have(e1) | -Theme(e1,x2) | -Actor(e1,x1))))