TSTP Solution File: SYN391+1 by SInE---0.4
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SInE---0.4
% Problem : SYN391+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 13:19:14 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 0.15s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.15s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 10
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 15 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 50 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 8 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 61 ( 26 ~; 23 |; 9 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 7 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 0 ( 0 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 3 prp; 0-0 aty)
% Number of functors : 0 ( 0 usr; 0 con; --- aty)
% Number of variables : 0 ( 0 sgn 0 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(1,conjecture,
( ( ( p1
| p2 )
& ( ~ p1
| p2 )
& ( p1
| ~ p2 ) )
=> ~ ( ~ p1
| ~ p2 ) ),
file('/tmp/tmpGqQ5Kp/sel_SYN391+1.p_1',pel9) ).
fof(2,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ( p1
| p2 )
& ( ~ p1
| p2 )
& ( p1
| ~ p2 ) )
=> ~ ( ~ p1
| ~ p2 ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[1]) ).
fof(3,negated_conjecture,
~ ( ( ( p1
| p2 )
& ( ~ p1
| p2 )
& ( p1
| ~ p2 ) )
=> ~ ( ~ p1
| ~ p2 ) ),
inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[2,theory(equality)]) ).
fof(4,negated_conjecture,
( ( p1
| p2 )
& ( ~ p1
| p2 )
& ( p1
| ~ p2 )
& ( ~ p1
| ~ p2 ) ),
inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[3]) ).
cnf(5,negated_conjecture,
( ~ p2
| ~ p1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[4]) ).
cnf(6,negated_conjecture,
( p1
| ~ p2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[4]) ).
cnf(7,negated_conjecture,
( p2
| ~ p1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[4]) ).
cnf(8,negated_conjecture,
( p2
| p1 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[4]) ).
cnf(9,negated_conjecture,
p1,
inference(csr,[status(thm)],[6,8]) ).
cnf(11,negated_conjecture,
( p2
| $false ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[7,9,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(12,negated_conjecture,
p2,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[11,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(13,negated_conjecture,
( $false
| ~ p2 ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[5,9,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(14,negated_conjecture,
( $false
| $false ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[13,12,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[14,theory(equality)]) ).
cnf(16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
15,
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% % SZS status Started for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN391+1.p
% --creating new selector for []
% -running prover on /tmp/tmpGqQ5Kp/sel_SYN391+1.p_1 with time limit 29
% -prover status Theorem
% Problem SYN391+1.p solved in phase 0.
% % SZS status Theorem for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN391+1.p
% % SZS status Ended for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN391+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
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------