TSTP Solution File: ITP010+2 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : ITP010+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v7.5.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n017.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 22:45:51 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 1.41s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 5 ( 3 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 15 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 3 avg)
% Number of connectives : 16 ( 6 ~; 0 |; 0 &)
% ( 2 <=>; 8 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 12 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 2 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 1 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 8 ( 0 sgn 8 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(conj_thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE,conjecture,
! [X9] :
( ne(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ne(X10)
=> ! [X14] :
( mem(X14,arr(X9,bool))
=> ! [X15] :
( mem(X15,arr(X10,bool))
=> ( ~ p(ap(ap(c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq(X9,X10),X14),X15))
<=> ~ p(ap(ap(c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq(X9,X10),X14),X15)) ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',conj_thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X9] :
( ne(X9)
=> ! [X10] :
( ne(X10)
=> ! [X14] :
( mem(X14,arr(X9,bool))
=> ! [X15] :
( mem(X15,arr(X10,bool))
=> ( ~ p(ap(ap(c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq(X9,X10),X14),X15))
<=> ~ p(ap(ap(c_2Ecardinal_2Ecardleq(X9,X10),X14),X15)) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[conj_thm_2Ecardinal_2ECARD__NOT__LE]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ $true,
inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : ITP010+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v7.5.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n017.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
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Fri Jun 3 02:31:43 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.23/1.41 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.23/1.41 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.23/1.41 # Preprocessing time : 0.019 s
% 0.23/1.41
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof found!
% 0.23/1.41 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/1.41 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object total steps : 5
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object clause steps : 2
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object formula steps : 3
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object conjectures : 5
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object initial clauses used : 1
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object initial formulas used : 1
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object generating inferences : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 1
% 0.23/1.41 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.23/1.41 # Parsed axioms : 41
% 0.23/1.41 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 20
% 0.23/1.41 # Initial clauses : 89
% 0.23/1.41 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 51
% 0.23/1.41 # Initial clauses in saturation : 38
% 0.23/1.41 # Processed clauses : 1
% 0.23/1.41 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # ...remaining for further processing : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Generated clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Current number of processed clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 37
% 0.23/1.41 # ...number of literals in the above : 166
% 0.23/1.41 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/1.41 # Termbank termtop insertions : 5140
% 0.23/1.41
% 0.23/1.41 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/1.41 # User time : 0.015 s
% 0.23/1.41 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/1.41 # Total time : 0.019 s
% 0.23/1.41 # Maximum resident set size: 2896 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------