TSTP Solution File: KLE064+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : KLE064+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n010.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 01:55:41 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.22s 1.41s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.22s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 4
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 17 ( 14 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 20 ( 19 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 6 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 2 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 28 ( 0 sgn 18 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(goals,conjecture,
! [X4,X5] :
( addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X5),X4)) = multiplication(domain(X5),X4)
<= addition(domain(X4),domain(X5)) = domain(X5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',goals) ).
fof(additive_associativity,axiom,
! [X3,X2,X1] : addition(X1,addition(X2,X3)) = addition(addition(X1,X2),X3),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',additive_associativity) ).
fof(domain1,axiom,
! [X4] : addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X4),X4)) = multiplication(domain(X4),X4),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+5.ax',domain1) ).
fof(left_distributivity,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] : multiplication(addition(X1,X2),X3) = addition(multiplication(X1,X3),multiplication(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+0.ax',left_distributivity) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X4,X5] :
( addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X5),X4)) = multiplication(domain(X5),X4)
<= addition(domain(X4),domain(X5)) = domain(X5) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6] : addition(X6,addition(X5,X4)) = addition(addition(X6,X5),X4),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[additive_associativity]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X5] : addition(X5,multiplication(domain(X5),X5)) = multiplication(domain(X5),X5),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[domain1]) ).
fof(c_0_7,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_8,negated_conjecture,
( addition(domain(esk1_0),domain(esk2_0)) = domain(esk2_0)
& addition(esk1_0,multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0)) != multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
addition(X1,addition(X2,X3)) = addition(addition(X1,X2),X3),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
addition(X1,multiplication(domain(X1),X1)) = multiplication(domain(X1),X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
multiplication(addition(X1,X2),X3) = addition(multiplication(X1,X3),multiplication(X2,X3)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
addition(domain(esk1_0),domain(esk2_0)) = domain(esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,plain,
addition(X1,addition(multiplication(domain(X1),X1),X2)) = addition(multiplication(domain(X1),X1),X2),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
addition(multiplication(domain(esk1_0),X1),multiplication(domain(esk2_0),X1)) = multiplication(domain(esk2_0),X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
addition(esk1_0,multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0)) != multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]),c_0_15]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : KLE064+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n010.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 09:34:23 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.22/1.41 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.22/1.41 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.22/1.41 # Preprocessing time : 0.015 s
% 0.22/1.41
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof found!
% 0.22/1.41 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.22/1.41 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object total steps : 17
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object clause steps : 8
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object formula steps : 9
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object conjectures : 7
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object clause conjectures : 4
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object initial formulas used : 4
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object generating inferences : 3
% 0.22/1.41 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.22/1.41 # Parsed axioms : 18
% 0.22/1.41 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 8
% 0.22/1.41 # Initial clauses : 11
% 0.22/1.41 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Initial clauses in saturation : 11
% 0.22/1.41 # Processed clauses : 75
% 0.22/1.41 # ...of these trivial : 13
% 0.22/1.41 # ...subsumed : 14
% 0.22/1.41 # ...remaining for further processing : 48
% 0.22/1.41 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Generated clauses : 694
% 0.22/1.41 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 563
% 0.22/1.41 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Paramodulations : 694
% 0.22/1.41 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of processed clauses : 48
% 0.22/1.41 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 43
% 0.22/1.41 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.22/1.41 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.22/1.41 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 499
% 0.22/1.41 # ...number of literals in the above : 499
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.22/1.41 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # BW rewrite match attempts : 218
% 0.22/1.41 # BW rewrite match successes : 40
% 0.22/1.41 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.22/1.41 # Termbank termtop insertions : 10922
% 0.22/1.41
% 0.22/1.41 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.22/1.41 # User time : 0.023 s
% 0.22/1.41 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.22/1.41 # Total time : 0.027 s
% 0.22/1.41 # Maximum resident set size: 3340 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------