TSTP Solution File: KLE059+1 by SRASS---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : KLE059+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art09.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 : Wed Dec 29 07:51:25 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 0.89s
% Output : Solution 0.89s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ERROR: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% Reading problem from /tmp/SystemOnTPTP5579/KLE059+1.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ... found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP5579/KLE059+1.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP5579/KLE059+1.tptp
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% TreeLimitedRun: /home/graph/tptp/Systems/EP---1.2/eproof --print-statistics -xAuto -tAuto --cpu-limit=60 --proof-time-unlimited --memory-limit=Auto --tstp-in --tstp-out /tmp/SRASS.s.p
% TreeLimitedRun: CPU time limit is 60s
% TreeLimitedRun: WC time limit is 120s
% TreeLimitedRun: PID is 5675
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.00 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.012 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(1, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:addition(X1,X2)=addition(X2,X1),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', additive_commutativity)).
% fof(4, axiom,![X4]:![X5]:domain(addition(X4,X5))=addition(domain(X4),domain(X5)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', domain5)).
% fof(18, conjecture,![X4]:![X5]:(addition(X4,X5)=X5=>addition(domain(X4),domain(X5))=domain(X5)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', goals)).
% fof(19, negated_conjecture,~(![X4]:![X5]:(addition(X4,X5)=X5=>addition(domain(X4),domain(X5))=domain(X5))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[18])).
% fof(20, plain,![X3]:![X4]:addition(X3,X4)=addition(X4,X3),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[1])).
% cnf(21,plain,(addition(X1,X2)=addition(X2,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[20])).
% fof(26, plain,![X6]:![X7]:domain(addition(X6,X7))=addition(domain(X6),domain(X7)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[4])).
% cnf(27,plain,(domain(addition(X1,X2))=addition(domain(X1),domain(X2))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[26])).
% fof(55, negated_conjecture,?[X4]:?[X5]:(addition(X4,X5)=X5&~(addition(domain(X4),domain(X5))=domain(X5))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[19])).
% fof(56, negated_conjecture,?[X6]:?[X7]:(addition(X6,X7)=X7&~(addition(domain(X6),domain(X7))=domain(X7))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[55])).
% fof(57, negated_conjecture,(addition(esk1_0,esk2_0)=esk2_0&~(addition(domain(esk1_0),domain(esk2_0))=domain(esk2_0))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[56])).
% cnf(58,negated_conjecture,(addition(domain(esk1_0),domain(esk2_0))!=domain(esk2_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[57])).
% cnf(59,negated_conjecture,(addition(esk1_0,esk2_0)=esk2_0),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[57])).
% cnf(71,negated_conjecture,(addition(domain(esk2_0),domain(esk1_0))!=domain(esk2_0)),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[58,21,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(73,negated_conjecture,(addition(esk2_0,esk1_0)=esk2_0),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[59,21,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(230,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[71,27,theory(equality)]),73,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(231,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[230,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(232,negated_conjecture,($false),231,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 27
% # ...of these trivial : 1
% # ...subsumed : 0
% # ...remaining for further processing: 26
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 3
% # Generated clauses : 94
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 60
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% # Paramodulations : 93
% # Factorizations : 0
% # Equation resolutions : 1
% # Current number of processed clauses: 22
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 18
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% # Negative unit clauses : 0
% # Non-unit-clauses : 3
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 50
% # ...number of literals in the above : 57
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 16
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 12
% # Backwards rewriting index: 35 leaves, 1.26+/-0.840 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 17 leaves, 1.18+/-0.513 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 27 leaves, 1.22+/-0.567 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.012 s
% # System time : 0.003 s
% # Total time : 0.015 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.09 CPU 0.17 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.09 CPU 0.17 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP5579/KLE059+1.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------