TSTP Solution File: LCL012-1 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : LCL012-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n020.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 14:27:21 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 30.19s 30.39s
% Output : Refutation 30.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : LCL012-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.03/0.13 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % 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 : Mon Jul 4 12:47:29 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.35 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.12/0.35 The process was started by sandbox on n020.cluster.edu,
% 0.12/0.35 Mon Jul 4 12:47:29 2022
% 0.12/0.35 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 12337.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.12/0.35 set(auto).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.12/0.35 clear(print_given).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 list(usable).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=1, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=3.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 This is a Horn set without equality. The strategy will
% 0.12/0.35 be hyperresolution, with satellites in sos and nuclei
% 0.12/0.35 in usable.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(order_hyper).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ------------> process usable:
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ------------> process sos:
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.18/0.38 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.18/0.38 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.18/0.38 number of clauses in intial UL: 2
% 0.18/0.38 number of clauses initially in problem: 3
% 0.18/0.38 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 66
% 0.18/0.38 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 100
% 0.18/0.38 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.18/0.38 absolute distinct symbol count: 5
% 0.18/0.38 distinct predicate count: 1
% 0.18/0.38 distinct function count: 1
% 0.18/0.38 distinct constant count: 3
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38
% 0.18/0.38 =========== start of search ===========
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93 Changing weight limit from 60 to 40.
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93 Model 3 [ 1 1 965 ] (0.00 seconds, 231164 Inserts)
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93 Model 4 [ 2 412 234815 ] (0.00 seconds, 237601 Inserts)
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93 Model 5 [ 7 0 154 ] (0.00 seconds, 228765 Inserts)
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93 Model 6 [ 3 1 663 ] (0.00 seconds, 230383 Inserts)
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.71/22.93 Resetting weight limit to 40 after 75 givens.
% 22.71/22.93
% 22.87/23.07
% 22.87/23.07
% 22.87/23.07 Changing weight limit from 40 to 36.
% 22.87/23.07
% 22.87/23.07 Resetting weight limit to 36 after 80 givens.
% 22.87/23.07
% 23.16/23.37
% 23.16/23.37
% 23.16/23.37 Changing weight limit from 36 to 32.
% 23.16/23.37
% 23.16/23.37 Resetting weight limit to 32 after 85 givens.
% 23.16/23.37
% 23.20/23.41
% 23.20/23.41
% 23.20/23.41 Changing weight limit from 32 to 28.
% 23.20/23.41
% 23.20/23.41 Resetting weight limit to 28 after 90 givens.
% 23.20/23.41
% 23.27/23.46
% 23.27/23.46
% 23.27/23.46 Changing weight limit from 28 to 24.
% 23.27/23.46
% 23.27/23.46 Resetting weight limit to 24 after 95 givens.
% 23.27/23.46
% 23.57/23.75
% 23.57/23.75
% 23.57/23.75 Changing weight limit from 24 to 20.
% 23.57/23.75
% 23.57/23.75 Resetting weight limit to 20 after 155 givens.
% 23.57/23.75
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 -- HEY sandbox, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 29.89 sec ----> 73913 [binary,73912.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 Length of proof is 25. Level of proof is 16.
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 30.19/30.39 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 30.19/30.39 % SZS output start Refutation
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 1 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,B))| -is_a_theorem(A)|is_a_theorem(B).
% 30.19/30.39 2 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),equivalent(equivalent(c,a),equivalent(b,c)))).
% 30.19/30.39 3 [] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),equivalent(B,equivalent(C,A)))).
% 30.19/30.39 4 [hyper,3,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,equivalent(A,C)),equivalent(C,B)))).
% 30.19/30.39 7 [hyper,4,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),D),equivalent(C,equivalent(D,B))),E)),equivalent(E,A))).
% 30.19/30.39 24 [hyper,7,1,4] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(B,C),A)),C)).
% 30.19/30.39 34 [hyper,24,1,4] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(equivalent(C,D),B)),D),E)),equivalent(E,A))).
% 30.19/30.39 35 [hyper,24,1,4] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),B),A)).
% 30.19/30.39 36 [hyper,35,1,35] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,A)).
% 30.19/30.39 40 [hyper,35,1,4] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),C),B),D)),equivalent(D,A))).
% 30.19/30.39 41 [hyper,35,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,equivalent(B,A)))).
% 30.19/30.39 47 [hyper,36,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,A),B))).
% 30.19/30.39 62 [hyper,41,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),D),equivalent(C,equivalent(D,B)))))).
% 30.19/30.39 84 [hyper,47,1,36] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,B)),A)).
% 30.19/30.39 85 [hyper,47,1,35] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),C),B)),A)).
% 30.19/30.39 105 [hyper,84,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,A)),B)).
% 30.19/30.39 107 [hyper,105,1,47] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,equivalent(C,B)),C)),A)).
% 30.19/30.39 400 [hyper,85,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,A),C),C)),B)).
% 30.19/30.39 1355 [hyper,400,1,107] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,equivalent(C,B)),C),A),D),D))).
% 30.19/30.39 14379 [hyper,1355,1,34] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,A),equivalent(C,equivalent(B,C))))).
% 30.19/30.39 14380 [hyper,1355,1,7] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,equivalent(C,equivalent(A,C)))),B)).
% 30.19/30.39 14479 [hyper,14379,1,40] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),C),A)),B)).
% 30.19/30.39 15038 [hyper,14380,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,equivalent(C,B))),equivalent(A,C))).
% 30.19/30.39 15696 [hyper,14479,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),B),C),equivalent(A,C))).
% 30.19/30.39 17104 [hyper,15038,1,62] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,C)),equivalent(equivalent(C,A),B))).
% 30.19/30.39 23315 [hyper,17104,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),A),C))).
% 30.19/30.39 45311 [hyper,23315,1,15696] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(A,B)),C))).
% 30.19/30.39 73912 [hyper,45311,1,17104] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(C,A),equivalent(B,C)))).
% 30.19/30.39 73913 [binary,73912.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 % SZS output end Refutation
% 30.19/30.39 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 ============ end of search ============
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 true clauses given 93 (12.4%)
% 30.19/30.39 false clauses given 657
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 FALSE TRUE
% 30.19/30.39 12 67 44
% 30.19/30.39 16 2433 777
% 30.19/30.39 20 0 1679
% 30.19/30.39 tot: 2500 2500 (50.0% true)
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 Model 6 [ 3 1 663 ] (0.00 seconds, 230383 Inserts)
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 30.19/30.39
% 30.19/30.39 Process 12337 finished Mon Jul 4 12:47:59 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------