TSTP Solution File: SYN409+1 by SInE---0.4
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SInE---0.4
% Problem : SYN409+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : Source/sine.py -e eprover -t %d %s
% Computer : art04.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 i686
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2793MHz
% Memory : 2018MB
% OS : Linux 2.6.26.8-57.fc8
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Sun Dec 26 13:20:29 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 0.27s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.27s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 15
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 59 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 67 ( 25 ~; 28 |; 12 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 9 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-1 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 3 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 32 ( 5 sgn 21 !; 6 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(1,conjecture,
( ! [X1] : f(X1)
<=> ! [X2,X3] :
( f(X2)
& f(X3) ) ),
file('/tmp/tmpVSFkTx/sel_SYN409+1.p_1',kalish246) ).
fof(2,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ! [X1] : f(X1)
<=> ! [X2,X3] :
( f(X2)
& f(X3) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[1]) ).
fof(3,negated_conjecture,
( ( ? [X1] : ~ f(X1)
| ? [X2,X3] :
( ~ f(X2)
| ~ f(X3) ) )
& ( ! [X1] : f(X1)
| ! [X2,X3] :
( f(X2)
& f(X3) ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[2]) ).
fof(4,negated_conjecture,
( ( ? [X4] : ~ f(X4)
| ? [X5,X6] :
( ~ f(X5)
| ~ f(X6) ) )
& ( ! [X7] : f(X7)
| ! [X8,X9] :
( f(X8)
& f(X9) ) ) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[3]) ).
fof(5,negated_conjecture,
( ( ~ f(esk1_0)
| ~ f(esk2_0)
| ~ f(esk3_0) )
& ( ! [X7] : f(X7)
| ! [X8,X9] :
( f(X8)
& f(X9) ) ) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[4]) ).
fof(6,negated_conjecture,
! [X7,X8,X9] :
( ( ( f(X8)
& f(X9) )
| f(X7) )
& ( ~ f(esk1_0)
| ~ f(esk2_0)
| ~ f(esk3_0) ) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[5]) ).
fof(7,negated_conjecture,
! [X7,X8,X9] :
( ( f(X8)
| f(X7) )
& ( f(X9)
| f(X7) )
& ( ~ f(esk1_0)
| ~ f(esk2_0)
| ~ f(esk3_0) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[6]) ).
cnf(8,negated_conjecture,
( ~ f(esk3_0)
| ~ f(esk2_0)
| ~ f(esk1_0) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[7]) ).
cnf(9,negated_conjecture,
( f(X1)
| f(X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[7]) ).
cnf(13,negated_conjecture,
( f(X1)
| ~ f(esk1_0)
| ~ f(esk2_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[8,9,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(15,negated_conjecture,
( f(X1)
| ~ f(esk1_0) ),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[13,9]) ).
cnf(16,negated_conjecture,
f(X1),
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[15,9]) ).
cnf(17,negated_conjecture,
( $false
| ~ f(esk2_0)
| ~ f(esk3_0) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[8,16,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(18,negated_conjecture,
( $false
| $false
| ~ f(esk3_0) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[17,16,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(19,negated_conjecture,
( $false
| $false
| $false ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[18,16,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(20,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[19,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(21,negated_conjecture,
$false,
20,
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% % SZS status Started for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN409+1.p
% --creating new selector for []
% -running prover on /tmp/tmpVSFkTx/sel_SYN409+1.p_1 with time limit 29
% -prover status Theorem
% Problem SYN409+1.p solved in phase 0.
% % SZS status Theorem for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN409+1.p
% % SZS status Ended for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN409+1.p
% Solved 1 out of 1.
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% See solution above
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------