%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SInE---0.4
% Problem  : SYN400+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : Source/sine.py -e eprover -t %d %s

% Computer : art02.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 13:19:52 EST 2010

% Result   : Theorem 0.16s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.16s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    9
%            Number of leaves      :    1
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   11 (   3 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   27 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   27 (  11   ~;  10   |;   4   &)
%                                         (   2 <=>;   0  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    5 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    0 (   0 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    2 (   1 usr;   2 prp; 0-0 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    0 (   0 usr;   0 con; --- aty)
%            Number of variables   :    8 (   8 sgn   6   !;   2   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(1,conjecture,
    ( ! [X1] : p
  <=> p ),
    file('/tmp/tmpKBVqO2/sel_SYN400+1.p_1',kalish227) ).

fof(2,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ( ! [X1] : p
    <=> p ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[1]) ).

fof(3,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( ? [X1] : ~ p
      | ~ p )
    & ( ! [X1] : p
      | p ) ),
    inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[2]) ).

fof(4,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( ? [X2] : ~ p
      | ~ p )
    & ( ! [X3] : p
      | p ) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[3]) ).

fof(5,negated_conjecture,
    ( ( ~ p
      | ~ p )
    & ( ! [X3] : p
      | p ) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[4]) ).

fof(6,negated_conjecture,
    ! [X3] :
      ( ( p
        | p )
      & ( ~ p
        | ~ p ) ),
    inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[5]) ).

cnf(7,negated_conjecture,
    ( ~ p
    | ~ p ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[6]) ).

cnf(8,negated_conjecture,
    ( p
    | p ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[6]) ).

cnf(9,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[7,8,theory(equality)]) ).

cnf(10,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[9,theory(equality)]) ).

cnf(11,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    10,
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% % SZS status Started for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN400+1.p
% --creating new selector for []
% -running prover on /tmp/tmpKBVqO2/sel_SYN400+1.p_1 with time limit 29
% -prover status Theorem
% Problem SYN400+1.p solved in phase 0.
% % SZS status Theorem for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN400+1.p
% % SZS status Ended for /home/graph/tptp/TPTP/Problems/SYN/SYN400+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
% 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------