Consider the following premises. forall x_13: W(x_13). forall x_13: Q(x_13) -> U_2(x_13). forall x_13: Q(x_13) -> ~W(x_13). exists x_13: U_2(x_13) -> Q(x_13). forall x_13: Q(x_13) -> U_2(x_13). Can we infer forall x_13: U_2(x_13) from them?
 From forall x_13: Q(x_13) -> U_2(x_13), exists x_13: U_2(x_13) -> Q(x_13) we can infer exists x_13: Q(x_13) <-> U_2(x_13). From exists x_13: Q(x_13) <-> U_2(x_13) we can infer exists x_13: U_2(x_13) -> Q(x_13). From forall x_13: Q(x_13) -> U_2(x_13), exists x_13: U_2(x_13) -> Q(x_13) we can infer exists x_13: Q(x_13) <-> U_2(x_13). From forall x_13: Q(x_13) -> ~W(x_13), forall x_13: W(x_13) we can infer forall x_13: ~Q(x_13). Finally, from exists x_13: Q(x_13) <-> U_2(x_13), forall x_13: ~Q(x_13) we can infer exists x_13: ~U_2(x_13), which contradicts forall x_13: U_2(x_13). Therefore, the answer is no.