TSTP Solution File: SWC359+1 by SInE---0.4
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SInE---0.4
% Problem : SWC359+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 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 11:38:21 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 0.18s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.18s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 112 ( 16 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 15 ( 8 avg)
% Number of connectives : 140 ( 42 ~; 34 |; 52 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 12 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 21 ( 10 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 5 con; 0-0 aty)
% Number of variables : 27 ( 0 sgn 16 !; 11 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(29,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ~ neq(X2,nil)
| ~ segmentP(X4,X3)
| ~ equalelemsP(X3)
| ? [X5] :
( ssList(X5)
& neq(X3,X5)
& segmentP(X4,X5)
& segmentP(X5,X3)
& equalelemsP(X5) )
| segmentP(X2,X1) ) ) ) ) ),
file('/tmp/tmpvGMD6q/sel_SWC359+1.p_1',co1) ).
fof(30,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ~ neq(X2,nil)
| ~ segmentP(X4,X3)
| ~ equalelemsP(X3)
| ? [X5] :
( ssList(X5)
& neq(X3,X5)
& segmentP(X4,X5)
& segmentP(X5,X3)
& equalelemsP(X5) )
| segmentP(X2,X1) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[29]) ).
fof(31,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ~ neq(X2,nil)
| ~ segmentP(X4,X3)
| ~ equalelemsP(X3)
| ? [X5] :
( ssList(X5)
& neq(X3,X5)
& segmentP(X4,X5)
& segmentP(X5,X3)
& equalelemsP(X5) )
| segmentP(X2,X1) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[30,theory(equality)]) ).
fof(160,negated_conjecture,
? [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
& ? [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
& ? [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
& ? [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
& X2 = X4
& X1 = X3
& neq(X2,nil)
& segmentP(X4,X3)
& equalelemsP(X3)
& ! [X5] :
( ~ ssList(X5)
| ~ neq(X3,X5)
| ~ segmentP(X4,X5)
| ~ segmentP(X5,X3)
| ~ equalelemsP(X5) )
& ~ segmentP(X2,X1) ) ) ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[31]) ).
fof(161,negated_conjecture,
? [X6] :
( ssList(X6)
& ? [X7] :
( ssList(X7)
& ? [X8] :
( ssList(X8)
& ? [X9] :
( ssList(X9)
& X7 = X9
& X6 = X8
& neq(X7,nil)
& segmentP(X9,X8)
& equalelemsP(X8)
& ! [X10] :
( ~ ssList(X10)
| ~ neq(X8,X10)
| ~ segmentP(X9,X10)
| ~ segmentP(X10,X8)
| ~ equalelemsP(X10) )
& ~ segmentP(X7,X6) ) ) ) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[160]) ).
fof(162,negated_conjecture,
( ssList(esk11_0)
& ssList(esk12_0)
& ssList(esk13_0)
& ssList(esk14_0)
& esk12_0 = esk14_0
& esk11_0 = esk13_0
& neq(esk12_0,nil)
& segmentP(esk14_0,esk13_0)
& equalelemsP(esk13_0)
& ! [X10] :
( ~ ssList(X10)
| ~ neq(esk13_0,X10)
| ~ segmentP(esk14_0,X10)
| ~ segmentP(X10,esk13_0)
| ~ equalelemsP(X10) )
& ~ segmentP(esk12_0,esk11_0) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[161]) ).
fof(163,negated_conjecture,
! [X10] :
( ( ~ ssList(X10)
| ~ neq(esk13_0,X10)
| ~ segmentP(esk14_0,X10)
| ~ segmentP(X10,esk13_0)
| ~ equalelemsP(X10) )
& esk12_0 = esk14_0
& esk11_0 = esk13_0
& neq(esk12_0,nil)
& segmentP(esk14_0,esk13_0)
& equalelemsP(esk13_0)
& ~ segmentP(esk12_0,esk11_0)
& ssList(esk14_0)
& ssList(esk13_0)
& ssList(esk12_0)
& ssList(esk11_0) ),
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[162]) ).
cnf(168,negated_conjecture,
~ segmentP(esk12_0,esk11_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[163]) ).
cnf(170,negated_conjecture,
segmentP(esk14_0,esk13_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[163]) ).
cnf(172,negated_conjecture,
esk11_0 = esk13_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[163]) ).
cnf(173,negated_conjecture,
esk12_0 = esk14_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[163]) ).
cnf(178,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[168,173,theory(equality)]),172,theory(equality)]),170,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(179,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[178,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(180,negated_conjecture,
$false,
179,
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% % SZS status Started for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SWC/SWC359+1.p
% --creating new selector for [SWC001+0.ax]
% -running prover on /tmp/tmpvGMD6q/sel_SWC359+1.p_1 with time limit 29
% -prover status Theorem
% Problem SWC359+1.p solved in phase 0.
% % SZS status Theorem for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SWC/SWC359+1.p
% % SZS status Ended for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SWC/SWC359+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
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------