TSTP Solution File: KLE021+1 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : KLE021+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n018.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 : Sun Jul 17 01:55:22 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.21s 1.40s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    6
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   24 (  13 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   51 (  29 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :   10 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   46 (  19   ~;  15   |;   7   &)
%                                         (   2 <=>;   3  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :   12 (   3 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    4 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    4 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    7 (   7 usr;   4 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   39 (   3 sgn  27   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(goals,conjecture,
    ! [X4,X5] :
      ( test(X5)
     => X4 = addition(multiplication(X5,X4),multiplication(c(X5),X4)) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',goals) ).

fof(test_3,axiom,
    ! [X4,X5] :
      ( test(X4)
     => ( c(X4) = X5
      <=> complement(X4,X5) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+1.ax',test_3) ).

fof(left_distributivity,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] : multiplication(addition(X1,X2),X3) = addition(multiplication(X1,X3),multiplication(X2,X3)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',left_distributivity) ).

fof(test_2,axiom,
    ! [X4,X5] :
      ( complement(X5,X4)
    <=> ( multiplication(X4,X5) = zero
        & multiplication(X5,X4) = zero
        & addition(X4,X5) = one ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+1.ax',test_2) ).

fof(additive_commutativity,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] : addition(X1,X2) = addition(X2,X1),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_commutativity) ).

fof(multiplicative_left_identity,axiom,
    ! [X1] : multiplication(one,X1) = X1,
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',multiplicative_left_identity) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X4,X5] :
        ( test(X5)
       => X4 = addition(multiplication(X5,X4),multiplication(c(X5),X4)) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals]) ).

fof(c_0_7,plain,
    ! [X6,X7,X7] :
      ( ( c(X6) != X7
        | complement(X6,X7)
        | ~ test(X6) )
      & ( ~ complement(X6,X7)
        | c(X6) = X7
        | ~ test(X6) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[test_3])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ( test(esk2_0)
    & esk1_0 != addition(multiplication(esk2_0,esk1_0),multiplication(c(esk2_0),esk1_0)) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_6])])]) ).

fof(c_0_9,plain,
    ! [X4,X5,X6] : multiplication(addition(X4,X5),X6) = addition(multiplication(X4,X6),multiplication(X5,X6)),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[left_distributivity]) ).

fof(c_0_10,plain,
    ! [X6,X7,X6,X7] :
      ( ( multiplication(X6,X7) = zero
        | ~ complement(X7,X6) )
      & ( multiplication(X7,X6) = zero
        | ~ complement(X7,X6) )
      & ( addition(X6,X7) = one
        | ~ complement(X7,X6) )
      & ( multiplication(X6,X7) != zero
        | multiplication(X7,X6) != zero
        | addition(X6,X7) != one
        | complement(X7,X6) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[test_2])])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,plain,
    ( complement(X1,X2)
    | ~ test(X1)
    | c(X1) != X2 ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).

fof(c_0_12,plain,
    ! [X3,X4] : addition(X3,X4) = addition(X4,X3),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[additive_commutativity]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    esk1_0 != addition(multiplication(esk2_0,esk1_0),multiplication(c(esk2_0),esk1_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,plain,
    multiplication(addition(X1,X2),X3) = addition(multiplication(X1,X3),multiplication(X2,X3)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,plain,
    ( addition(X2,X1) = one
    | ~ complement(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,plain,
    ( complement(X1,c(X1))
    | ~ test(X1) ),
    inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_11]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,plain,
    addition(X1,X2) = addition(X2,X1),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_12]) ).

fof(c_0_18,plain,
    ! [X2] : multiplication(one,X2) = X2,
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[multiplicative_left_identity]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    multiplication(addition(esk2_0,c(esk2_0)),esk1_0) != esk1_0,
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_20,plain,
    ( addition(X1,c(X1)) = one
    | ~ test(X1) ),
    inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_16]),c_0_17]) ).

cnf(c_0_21,plain,
    multiplication(one,X1) = X1,
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_18]) ).

cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
    test(esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20]),c_0_21]),c_0_22])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.11  % Problem  : KLE021+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.12/0.12  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n018.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 16 15:15:46 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.21/1.40  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.21/1.40  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.21/1.40  # Preprocessing time       : 0.015 s
% 0.21/1.40  
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof found!
% 0.21/1.40  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/1.40  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object total steps             : 24
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object clause steps            : 11
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object formula steps           : 13
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object conjectures             : 7
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 7
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 6
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object generating inferences   : 3
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.21/1.40  # Parsed axioms                        : 17
% 0.21/1.40  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Initial clauses                      : 22
% 0.21/1.40  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 22
% 0.21/1.40  # Processed clauses                    : 165
% 0.21/1.40  # ...of these trivial                  : 15
% 0.21/1.40  # ...subsumed                          : 66
% 0.21/1.40  # ...remaining for further processing  : 84
% 0.21/1.40  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Backward-rewritten                   : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # Generated clauses                    : 1061
% 0.21/1.40  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 722
% 0.21/1.40  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 18
% 0.21/1.40  # Paramodulations                      : 1057
% 0.21/1.40  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Equation resolutions                 : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of processed clauses  : 79
% 0.21/1.40  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 30
% 0.21/1.40  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 7
% 0.21/1.40  #    Negative unit clauses             : 2
% 0.21/1.40  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 40
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 578
% 0.21/1.40  # ...number of literals in the above   : 905
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of archived clauses   : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 291
% 0.21/1.40  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 284
% 0.21/1.40  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 63
% 0.21/1.40  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11
% 0.21/1.40  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 44
% 0.21/1.40  # BW rewrite match successes           : 26
% 0.21/1.40  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 10438
% 0.21/1.40  
% 0.21/1.40  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/1.40  # User time                : 0.030 s
% 0.21/1.40  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.21/1.40  # Total time               : 0.032 s
% 0.21/1.40  # Maximum resident set size: 3608 pages
% 0.21/23.40  eprover: CPU time limit exceeded, terminating
% 0.21/23.42  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.42  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.42  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.42  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.43  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.43  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.43  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.43  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.44  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.44  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.45  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.45  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.45  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.45  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.46  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.46  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.46  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.46  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.47  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.47  eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.47  eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.47  eprover: No such file or directory
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------