TSTP Solution File: FLD064-1 by Prover9---1109a
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Prover9---1109a
% Problem : FLD064-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : tptp2X_and_run_prover9 %d %s
% Computer : n025.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 : Sat Jul 16 02:24:29 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 1.66s 1.93s
% Output : Refutation 1.66s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.11 % Problem : FLD064-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v2.1.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : tptp2X_and_run_prover9 %d %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n025.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 : Mon Jun 6 19:59:18 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== Prover9 ===============================
% 1.66/1.93 Prover9 (32) version 2009-11A, November 2009.
% 1.66/1.93 Process 23167 was started by sandbox2 on n025.cluster.edu,
% 1.66/1.93 Mon Jun 6 19:59:19 2022
% 1.66/1.93 The command was "/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/prover9 -t 300 -f /tmp/Prover9_23013_n025.cluster.edu".
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end of head ===========================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== INPUT =================================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 % Reading from file /tmp/Prover9_23013_n025.cluster.edu
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 1.66/1.93 set(auto2).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> set(auto).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto) -> set(auto_inference).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto) -> set(auto_setup).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto_setup) -> set(predicate_elim).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto_setup) -> assign(eq_defs, unfold).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto) -> set(auto_limits).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto_limits) -> assign(max_weight, "100.000").
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto_limits) -> assign(sos_limit, 20000).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto) -> set(auto_denials).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto) -> set(auto_process).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(new_constants, 1).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(fold_denial_max, 3).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_weight, "200.000").
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_hours, 1).
% 1.66/1.93 % assign(max_hours, 1) -> assign(max_seconds, 3600).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_seconds, 0).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_minutes, 5).
% 1.66/1.93 % assign(max_minutes, 5) -> assign(max_seconds, 300).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> set(sort_initial_sos).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(sos_limit, -1).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(lrs_ticks, 3000).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(max_megs, 400).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> assign(stats, some).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> clear(echo_input).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> set(quiet).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> clear(print_initial_clauses).
% 1.66/1.93 % set(auto2) -> clear(print_given).
% 1.66/1.93 assign(lrs_ticks,-1).
% 1.66/1.93 assign(sos_limit,10000).
% 1.66/1.93 assign(order,kbo).
% 1.66/1.93 set(lex_order_vars).
% 1.66/1.93 clear(print_given).
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 % formulas(sos). % not echoed (30 formulas)
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end of input ==========================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 % From the command line: assign(max_seconds, 300).
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== PROCESS NON-CLAUSAL FORMULAS ==========
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 % Formulas that are not ordinary clauses:
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end of process non-clausal formulas ===
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== PROCESS INITIAL CLAUSES ===============
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== PREDICATE ELIMINATION =================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end predicate elimination =============
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Auto_denials: (non-Horn, no changes).
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Term ordering decisions:
% 1.66/1.93 Function symbol KB weights: additive_identity=1. multiplicative_identity=1. a=1. add=1. multiply=1. additive_inverse=1. multiplicative_inverse=1.
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end of process initial clauses ========
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== CLAUSES FOR SEARCH ====================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end of clauses for search =============
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== SEARCH ================================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 % Starting search at 0.01 seconds.
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=34.000, iters=3361
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=30.000, iters=3364
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=29.000, iters=3419
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=27.000, iters=3345
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=26.000, iters=3365
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=25.000, iters=3362
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=24.000, iters=3376
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=23.000, iters=3335
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=21.000, iters=3346
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=15.000, iters=4214
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=14.000, iters=3745
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=12.000, iters=3351
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (displace): id=5560, wt=34.000
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (displace): id=5628, wt=30.000
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (displace): id=10587, wt=12.000
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (displace): id=10593, wt=11.000
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (displace): id=10810, wt=8.000
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 NOTE: Back_subsumption disabled, ratio of kept to back_subsumed is 753 (0.00 of 0.58 sec).
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=9.000, iters=3884
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (displace): id=15916, wt=7.000
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Low Water (keep): wt=8.000, iters=3411
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== PROOF =================================
% 1.66/1.93 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 1.66/1.93 % SZS output start Refutation
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 % Proof 1 at 0.89 (+ 0.06) seconds.
% 1.66/1.93 % Length of proof is 24.
% 1.66/1.93 % Level of proof is 6.
% 1.66/1.93 % Maximum clause weight is 12.000.
% 1.66/1.93 % Given clauses 778.
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 1 defined(additive_identity) # label(well_definedness_of_additive_identity) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 3 defined(a) # label(a_is_defined) # label(hypothesis). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 4 less_or_equal(additive_identity,a) # label(less_or_equal_2) # label(negated_conjecture). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 6 -less_or_equal(additive_inverse(a),additive_identity) # label(not_less_or_equal_3) # label(negated_conjecture). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 7 defined(additive_inverse(A)) | -defined(A) # label(well_definedness_of_additive_inverse) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 9 equalish(A,B) | -equalish(B,A) # label(symmetry_of_equality) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 10 equalish(add(additive_identity,A),A) | -defined(A) # label(existence_of_identity_addition) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 12 equalish(add(A,additive_inverse(A)),additive_identity) | -defined(A) # label(existence_of_inverse_addition) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 17 less_or_equal(A,B) | -less_or_equal(A,C) | -less_or_equal(C,B) # label(transitivity_of_order_relation) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 19 less_or_equal(A,B) | -less_or_equal(C,B) | -equalish(C,A) # label(compatibility_of_equality_and_order_relation) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 20 less_or_equal(A,B) | less_or_equal(B,A) | -defined(A) | -defined(B) # label(totality_of_order_relation) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 25 less_or_equal(add(A,B),add(C,B)) | -defined(B) | -less_or_equal(A,C) # label(compatibility_of_order_relation_and_addition) # label(axiom). [assumption].
% 1.66/1.93 50 defined(additive_inverse(a)). [resolve(7,b,3,a)].
% 1.66/1.93 63 equalish(add(a,additive_inverse(a)),additive_identity). [resolve(12,b,3,a)].
% 1.66/1.93 87 less_or_equal(additive_identity,A) | less_or_equal(A,additive_identity) | -defined(A). [resolve(20,c,1,a)].
% 1.66/1.93 90 less_or_equal(additive_identity,additive_identity). [factor(87,a,b),unit_del(b,1)].
% 1.66/1.93 107 less_or_equal(add(additive_identity,A),add(a,A)) | -defined(A). [resolve(25,c,4,a)].
% 1.66/1.93 259 equalish(add(additive_identity,additive_inverse(a)),additive_inverse(a)). [resolve(50,a,10,b)].
% 1.66/1.93 429 less_or_equal(A,additive_identity) | -equalish(additive_identity,A). [resolve(90,a,19,b)].
% 1.66/1.93 1052 equalish(additive_identity,add(a,additive_inverse(a))). [resolve(63,a,9,b)].
% 1.66/1.93 7374 less_or_equal(add(a,additive_inverse(a)),additive_identity). [resolve(1052,a,429,b)].
% 1.66/1.93 9347 less_or_equal(add(additive_identity,additive_inverse(a)),add(a,additive_inverse(a))). [resolve(107,b,50,a)].
% 1.66/1.93 15641 -less_or_equal(additive_inverse(a),add(a,additive_inverse(a))). [ur(17,a,6,a,c,7374,a)].
% 1.66/1.93 17783 $F. [ur(19,a,15641,a,c,259,a),unit_del(a,9347)].
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 % SZS output end Refutation
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end of proof ==========================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== STATISTICS ============================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Given=778. Generated=92710. Kept=17782. proofs=1.
% 1.66/1.93 Usable=778. Sos=9998. Demods=0. Limbo=3, Disabled=7033. Hints=0.
% 1.66/1.93 Megabytes=10.06.
% 1.66/1.93 User_CPU=0.89, System_CPU=0.06, Wall_clock=1.
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end of statistics =====================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 ============================== end of search =========================
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 THEOREM PROVED
% 1.66/1.93 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Exiting with 1 proof.
% 1.66/1.93
% 1.66/1.93 Process 23167 exit (max_proofs) Mon Jun 6 19:59:20 2022
% 1.66/1.93 Prover9 interrupted
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------