Consider the following premises. forall x_11: R_11(x_11) -> R_1(x_11). forall x_11: P_9(x_11) -> W_2(x_11). forall x_11: Q_9(x_11) -> W_2(x_11). exists x_11: Q_11(x_11) -> R_11(x_11). forall x_11: P_9(x_11) or Q_9(x_11). forall x_11: W_2(x_11) -> Q_11(x_11). Can we infer forall x_11: ~R_1(x_11) from them?
 From forall x_11: W_2(x_11) -> Q_11(x_11), exists x_11: Q_11(x_11) -> R_11(x_11) we can infer exists x_11: W_2(x_11) -> R_11(x_11). From forall x_11: P_9(x_11) -> W_2(x_11), forall x_11: Q_9(x_11) -> W_2(x_11), forall x_11: P_9(x_11) or Q_9(x_11) we can infer forall x_11: W_2(x_11). From exists x_11: W_2(x_11) -> R_11(x_11), forall x_11: R_11(x_11) -> R_1(x_11) we can infer exists x_11: W_2(x_11) -> R_1(x_11). Finally, from exists x_11: W_2(x_11) -> R_1(x_11), forall x_11: W_2(x_11) we can infer exists x_11: R_1(x_11), which contradicts forall x_11: ~R_1(x_11). Therefore, the answer is no.