TSTP Solution File: LCL100-1 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : LCL100-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n019.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 14:27:55 EDT 2022
% Result : Timeout 295.93s 296.10s
% Output : None
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.00/0.09 % Problem : LCL100-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.00/0.10 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.09/0.30 % Computer : n019.cluster.edu
% 0.09/0.30 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.09/0.30 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.09/0.30 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.09/0.30 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.09/0.30 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.09/0.30 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.09/0.30 % DateTime : Tue Jul 5 01:21:53 EDT 2022
% 0.09/0.30 % CPUTime :
% 0.16/0.31 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.16/0.31 The process was started by sandbox on n019.cluster.edu,
% 0.16/0.31 Tue Jul 5 01:21:53 2022
% 0.16/0.31 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 18667.
% 0.16/0.31
% 0.16/0.31 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.16/0.31 set(auto).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.16/0.31 clear(print_given).
% 0.16/0.31
% 0.16/0.31 list(usable).
% 0.16/0.31
% 0.16/0.31 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=1, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=3.
% 0.16/0.31
% 0.16/0.31 This is a Horn set without equality. The strategy will
% 0.16/0.31 be hyperresolution, with satellites in sos and nuclei
% 0.16/0.31 in usable.
% 0.16/0.31
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.16/0.31 dependent: clear(order_hyper).
% 0.16/0.31
% 0.16/0.31 ------------> process usable:
% 0.16/0.31
% 0.16/0.31 ------------> process sos:
% 0.16/0.31
% 0.16/0.31 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.16/0.33 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.16/0.33 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.16/0.33 number of clauses in intial UL: 2
% 0.16/0.33 number of clauses initially in problem: 4
% 0.16/0.33 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 50
% 0.16/0.33 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 100
% 0.16/0.33 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.16/0.33 absolute distinct symbol count: 7
% 0.16/0.33 distinct predicate count: 1
% 0.16/0.33 distinct function count: 1
% 0.16/0.33 distinct constant count: 5
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33
% 0.16/0.33 =========== start of search ===========
% 1.21/1.40
% 1.21/1.40
% 1.21/1.40 Changing weight limit from 60 to 32.
% 1.21/1.40
% 1.21/1.40 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 1.21/1.40
% 1.21/1.40 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 1.21/1.40
% 1.21/1.40 Model 3 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 1.21/1.40
% 1.21/1.40 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 1.21/1.40
% 1.21/1.40 Resetting weight limit to 32 after 85 givens.
% 1.21/1.40
% 1.30/1.47
% 1.30/1.47
% 1.30/1.47 Changing weight limit from 32 to 28.
% 1.30/1.47
% 1.30/1.47 Resetting weight limit to 28 after 90 givens.
% 1.30/1.47
% 1.45/1.69
% 1.45/1.69
% 1.45/1.69 Changing weight limit from 28 to 24.
% 1.45/1.69
% 1.45/1.69 Resetting weight limit to 24 after 105 givens.
% 1.45/1.69
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 -- HEY sandbox, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 287.81 sec ----> 1299444 [binary,1299443.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 Length of proof is 28. Level of proof is 11.
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 295.93/296.10 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 295.93/296.10 % SZS output start Refutation
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 1 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,B))| -is_a_theorem(A)|is_a_theorem(B).
% 295.93/296.10 2 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),equivalent(a,c)),e),equivalent(equivalent(b,c),e)),falsehood),falsehood)).
% 295.93/296.10 3 [] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(A,C)),equivalent(B,C)),D),D)).
% 295.93/296.10 4 [] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),equivalent(equivalent(D,B),equivalent(equivalent(A,D),C)))).
% 295.93/296.10 5 [hyper,4,1,4] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(C,D),A),equivalent(equivalent(E,D),equivalent(equivalent(C,E),B))))).
% 295.93/296.10 6 [hyper,4,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,C)),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,D),A),equivalent(D,C)))).
% 295.93/296.10 8 [hyper,6,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),D),equivalent(C,equivalent(A,E))),equivalent(D,equivalent(B,E)))).
% 295.93/296.10 10 [hyper,6,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(C,A),equivalent(C,D))),equivalent(B,D))).
% 295.93/296.10 11 [hyper,6,1,4] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),equivalent(equivalent(D,B),E)),equivalent(C,equivalent(equivalent(D,A),E)))).
% 295.93/296.10 12 [hyper,6,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(C,D),equivalent(C,E)),equivalent(D,E)),equivalent(A,F))),equivalent(B,F))).
% 295.93/296.10 16 [hyper,5,1,10] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,B),A))).
% 295.93/296.10 36 [hyper,16,1,10] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,A)).
% 295.93/296.10 50 [hyper,36,1,4] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(C,A),equivalent(C,B)))).
% 295.93/296.10 61 [hyper,8,1,10] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,C)),equivalent(A,equivalent(B,D))),equivalent(C,D))).
% 295.93/296.10 62 [hyper,8,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(C,A),D)),equivalent(equivalent(C,B),D))).
% 295.93/296.10 63 [hyper,50,1,50] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,C)),equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(D,B),equivalent(D,C))))).
% 295.93/296.10 75 [hyper,50,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,equivalent(C,D))),equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(C,E),B),equivalent(E,D))))).
% 295.93/296.10 163 [hyper,62,1,61] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,A),B),B)).
% 295.93/296.10 209 [hyper,11,1,16] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(equivalent(C,B),A)))).
% 295.93/296.10 245 [hyper,209,1,63] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,equivalent(C,D)),equivalent(B,equivalent(equivalent(D,C),A))))).
% 295.93/296.10 254 [hyper,209,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),D),equivalent(C,equivalent(equivalent(B,A),D)))).
% 295.93/296.10 320 [hyper,163,1,50] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,B),C)),equivalent(A,C))).
% 295.93/296.10 2219 [hyper,245,1,12] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(D,C),equivalent(D,B)),A)))).
% 295.93/296.10 2329 [hyper,320,1,62] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(B,A),C)),C)).
% 295.93/296.10 2355 [hyper,2329,1,62] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(C,B)),D))),D)).
% 295.93/296.10 2372 [hyper,2329,1,4] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),D)),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(C,B),A),D))).
% 295.93/296.10 9818 [hyper,75,1,254] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),D),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,A),E),C),equivalent(E,D)))).
% 295.93/296.10 10711 [hyper,2219,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),D),equivalent(C,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(E,B),equivalent(E,A)),D)))).
% 295.93/296.10 11405 [hyper,2355,1,50] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,equivalent(equivalent(C,D),equivalent(equivalent(B,equivalent(D,C)),E)))),equivalent(A,E))).
% 295.93/296.10 368722 [hyper,9818,1,2372] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),D)),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(C,B),A),E)),equivalent(D,E))).
% 295.93/296.10 443383 [hyper,11405,1,10711] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),equivalent(equivalent(C,equivalent(equivalent(D,A),equivalent(D,B))),E)),E)).
% 295.93/296.10 1299443 [hyper,443383,1,368722] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(A,C)),D),equivalent(equivalent(B,C),D)),E),E)).
% 295.93/296.10 1299444 [binary,1299443.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 % SZS output end Refutation
% 295.93/296.10 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 ============ end of search ============
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 true clauses given 1321 (21.0%)
% 295.93/296.10 false clauses given 4966
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 FALSE TRUE
% 295.93/296.10 20 841 988
% 295.93/296.10 24 2133 1729
% 295.93/296.10 tot: 2974 2717 (47.7% true)
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 Model 3 (0.03 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 295.93/296.10
% 295.93/296.10 Process 18667 finished Tue Jul 5 01:26:49 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------