Consider the following premises. forall x_16: Q_8(x_16) -> P_3(x_16). exists x_16: P_16(x_16) <-> P_3(x_16). forall x_16: P_16(x_16) -> Q_8(x_16). forall x_16: P_16(x_16) -> R(x_16). Can we infer forall x_16: ~(P_3(x_16) -> R(x_16)) from them?
That contradicts the premises. Therefore the answer is no.