Consider the following premises. forall x_17: P_17(x_17) -> P_1(x_17). forall x_17: Q_17(x_17) -> P_1(x_17). forall x_17: P_1(x_17) -> U_1(x_17). forall x_18: P_18(x_18). forall x_17: P_17(x_17) or Q_17(x_17). Can we infer forall x_17: ~(P_18(x_17) and U_1(x_17)) from them?
 From forall x_18: P_18(x_18) we can infer P_18(a_18). From forall x_17: P_17(x_17) -> P_1(x_17), forall x_17: Q_17(x_17) -> P_1(x_17), forall x_17: P_17(x_17) or Q_17(x_17) we can infer forall x_17: P_1(x_17). From forall x_17: P_1(x_17) -> U_1(x_17), forall x_17: P_1(x_17) we can infer forall x_17: U_1(x_17). From P_18(a_18) we can infer exists x_17: P_18(x_17). Finally, from exists x_17: P_18(x_17), forall x_17: U_1(x_17) we can infer exists x_17: P_18(x_17) and U_1(x_17), which contradicts forall x_17: ~(P_18(x_17) and U_1(x_17)). Therefore, the answer is no.