TSTP Solution File: ALG036+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : ALG036+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.7.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% Model : x86_64 x86_64
% CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 2.10GHz
% Memory : 8042.1875MB
% OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% CPULimit : 300s
% WCLimit : 600s
% DateTime : Thu Jul 14 16:47:24 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 15 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 86 ( 72 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 32 ( 5 avg)
% Number of connectives : 84 ( 13 ~; 26 |; 44 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 2 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 0 ( 0 sgn 0 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
( ( op(e0,e0) = e0
& op(e1,e1) = e0
& op(e2,e2) = e0
& op(e3,e3) = e0 )
| ( op(e0,e0) = e1
& op(e1,e1) = e1
& op(e2,e2) = e1
& op(e3,e3) = e1 )
| ( op(e0,e0) = e2
& op(e1,e1) = e2
& op(e2,e2) = e2
& op(e3,e3) = e2 )
| ( op(e0,e0) = e3
& op(e1,e1) = e3
& op(e2,e2) = e3
& op(e3,e3) = e3 )
| ~ ( ( op(e0,e0) = e0
& op(e1,e1) = e0
& op(e2,e2) = e0
& op(e3,e3) = e0 )
| ( op(e0,e0) = e1
& op(e1,e1) = e1
& op(e2,e2) = e1
& op(e3,e3) = e1 )
| ( op(e0,e0) = e2
& op(e1,e1) = e2
& op(e2,e2) = e2
& op(e3,e3) = e2 )
| ( op(e0,e0) = e3
& op(e1,e1) = e3
& op(e2,e2) = e3
& op(e3,e3) = e3 ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',co1) ).
fof(c_0_1,plain,
( epred1_0
<=> ( ( op(e0,e0) = e0
& op(e1,e1) = e0
& op(e2,e2) = e0
& op(e3,e3) = e0 )
| ( op(e0,e0) = e1
& op(e1,e1) = e1
& op(e2,e2) = e1
& op(e3,e3) = e1 )
| ( op(e0,e0) = e2
& op(e1,e1) = e2
& op(e2,e2) = e2
& op(e3,e3) = e2 ) ) ),
introduced(definition) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ( epred1_0
| ( op(e0,e0) = e3
& op(e1,e1) = e3
& op(e2,e2) = e3
& op(e3,e3) = e3 )
| ~ ( epred1_0
| ( op(e0,e0) = e3
& op(e1,e1) = e3
& op(e2,e2) = e3
& op(e3,e3) = e3 ) ) ),
inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(apply_def,[status(thm)],[inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]),c_0_1]),c_0_1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( ~ epred1_0
& ( op(e0,e0) != e3
| op(e1,e1) != e3
| op(e2,e2) != e3
| op(e3,e3) != e3 )
& ( op(e0,e0) = e3
| epred1_0 )
& ( op(e1,e1) = e3
| epred1_0 )
& ( op(e2,e2) = e3
| epred1_0 )
& ( op(e3,e3) = e3
| epred1_0 ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( epred1_0
| op(e0,e0) = e3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ epred1_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
( epred1_0
| op(e1,e1) = e3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( epred1_0
| op(e2,e2) = e3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( epred1_0
| op(e3,e3) = e3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( op(e3,e3) != e3
| op(e2,e2) != e3
| op(e1,e1) != e3
| op(e0,e0) != e3 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
op(e0,e0) = e3,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
op(e1,e1) = e3,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
op(e2,e2) = e3,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
op(e3,e3) = e3,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_8,c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]),c_0_11]),c_0_12]),c_0_13])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.12 % Problem : ALG036+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.7.0.
% 0.11/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Thu Jun 9 04:28:02 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/1.40 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.22/1.40 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.22/1.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.018 s
% 0.22/1.40
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof found!
% 0.22/1.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/1.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object total steps : 15
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object clause steps : 11
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object formula steps : 4
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object conjectures : 14
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object clause conjectures : 11
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object initial formulas used : 1
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object generating inferences : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 9
% 0.22/1.40 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.22/1.40 # Parsed axioms : 7
% 0.22/1.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Initial clauses : 175
% 0.22/1.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 175
% 0.22/1.40 # Processed clauses : 13
% 0.22/1.40 # ...of these trivial : 1
% 0.22/1.40 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 11
% 0.22/1.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Generated clauses : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 9
% 0.22/1.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 4
% 0.22/1.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Negative unit clauses : 5
% 0.22/1.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 164
% 0.22/1.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 503
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.22/1.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/1.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 8641
% 0.22/1.40
% 0.22/1.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/1.40 # User time : 0.017 s
% 0.22/1.40 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.22/1.40 # Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.22/1.40 # Maximum resident set size: 3132 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------