TSTP Solution File: LCL009-1 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : LCL009-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n029.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 14:27:20 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 40.55s 40.73s
% Output : Refutation 40.55s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : LCL009-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n029.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Mon Jul 4 12:55:26 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.36 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.13/0.36 The process was started by sandbox on n029.cluster.edu,
% 0.13/0.36 Mon Jul 4 12:55:26 2022
% 0.13/0.36 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 29131.
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.13/0.36 set(auto).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.13/0.36 clear(print_given).
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 list(usable).
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=1, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=3.
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 This is a Horn set without equality. The strategy will
% 0.13/0.36 be hyperresolution, with satellites in sos and nuclei
% 0.13/0.36 in usable.
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: clear(order_hyper).
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 ------------> process usable:
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 ------------> process sos:
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.13/0.39 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.13/0.39 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.13/0.39 number of clauses in intial UL: 2
% 0.13/0.39 number of clauses initially in problem: 3
% 0.13/0.39 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 66
% 0.13/0.39 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 100
% 0.13/0.39 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.13/0.39 absolute distinct symbol count: 5
% 0.13/0.39 distinct predicate count: 1
% 0.13/0.39 distinct function count: 1
% 0.13/0.39 distinct constant count: 3
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39
% 0.13/0.39 =========== start of search ===========
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 -- HEY sandbox, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 3 [ 1 368 188120 ] (0.00 seconds, 190287 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 4 [ 1 1 657 ] (0.00 seconds, 176523 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 5 [ 3 0 225 ] (0.00 seconds, 170117 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 6 [ 3 1 391 ] (0.00 seconds, 189993 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 7 [ 3 1 874 ] (0.00 seconds, 190488 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 8 [ 4 1 1661 ] (0.00 seconds, 178625 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 9 [ 12 0 491 ] (0.00 seconds, 174547 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 10 [ 15 0 947 ] (0.00 seconds, 179014 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 11 [ 6 1 777 ] (0.00 seconds, 190367 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 40.34 sec ----> 381 [binary,380.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Length of proof is 10. Level of proof is 7.
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 40.55/40.73 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 40.55/40.73 % SZS output start Refutation
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 1 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,B))| -is_a_theorem(A)|is_a_theorem(B).
% 40.55/40.73 2 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),c),equivalent(a,equivalent(b,c)))).
% 40.55/40.73 3 [] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(C,B),equivalent(A,C)))).
% 40.55/40.73 4 [hyper,3,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(D,B))),equivalent(equivalent(D,C),A))).
% 40.55/40.73 5 [hyper,4,1,4] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(A,C),equivalent(equivalent(D,B),equivalent(C,D))))).
% 40.55/40.73 7 [hyper,4,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(A,B))).
% 40.55/40.73 8 [hyper,7,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,C)),equivalent(equivalent(B,C),A))).
% 40.55/40.73 9 [hyper,8,1,8] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),equivalent(C,equivalent(A,B)))).
% 40.55/40.73 13 [hyper,8,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(C,A)),equivalent(C,B))).
% 40.55/40.73 18 [hyper,5,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(equivalent(D,E),equivalent(C,D)))),equivalent(equivalent(B,E),A))).
% 40.55/40.73 38 [hyper,13,1,9] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,A)).
% 40.55/40.73 41 [hyper,38,1,5] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(C,A),equivalent(B,C)))).
% 40.55/40.73 380 [hyper,18,1,41] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),equivalent(A,equivalent(B,C)))).
% 40.55/40.73 381 [binary,380.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 % SZS output end Refutation
% 40.55/40.73 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 ============ end of search ============
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 true clauses given 3 (9.7%)
% 40.55/40.73 false clauses given 28
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 FALSE TRUE
% 40.55/40.73 8 0 1
% 40.55/40.73 12 89 29
% 40.55/40.73 16 96 0
% 40.55/40.73 20 58 0
% 40.55/40.73 24 29 0
% 40.55/40.73 28 15 0
% 40.55/40.73 32 2 0
% 40.55/40.73 36 1 0
% 40.55/40.73 tot: 290 30 (9.4% true)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Model 11 [ 6 1 777 ] (0.00 seconds, 190367 Inserts)
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 40.55/40.73
% 40.55/40.73 Process 29131 finished Mon Jul 4 12:56:07 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------