premise: Three hikers and a dog are walking through the foliage on the hillside.
hypothesis: People are hiking threw a woods.
explanation_1: there in inference that the hillside was in the woods. I think in sentence two threw should be through, small grammar error.
explanation_2: Three hikers and a dog are walking through the foliage on the hillside doesn't necessarily mean that they are hiking through woods.
explanation_3: People can go on a hike and not be in the woods.
premise_logic: exists e1 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5.(n_hillside(x5) & n_foliage(x4) & on(e1,x5) & through(e1,x4) & Actor(e1,x1) & v_walk(e1) & subset_of(x3,x1) & n_dog(x3) & subset_of(x2,x1) & n_hiker(x2) & card_eq_3(x2))
hypothesis_logic: exists e1 e2 x1 x2 x3.(Theme(e2,x3) & Actor(e2,x1) & v_throw(e2) & n_wood(x3) & Actor(e1,x2) & v_hike(e1) & (x1 = x2) & n_people(x1))
premise_sim: exists e1 x1 x2 x3 x4 x5.(v_walk(e1) & through(e1,x4) & subset_of(x3,x1) & subset_of(x2,x1) & on(e1,x5) & n_hillside(x5) & n_hiker(x2) & n_foliage(x4) & n_dog(x3) & card_eq_3(x2) & Actor(e1,x1))
hypothesis_sim: exists e1 e2 x1 x2 x3.(v_throw(e2) & v_hike(e1) & n_wood(x3) & n_people(x1) & Theme(e2,x3) & Actor(e2,x1) & Actor(e1,x2) & (x1 = x2))