TSTP Solution File: MGT004+1 by SOS---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SOS---2.0
% Problem  : MGT004+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : sos-script %s

% Computer : n032.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 22:25:45 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.69s 0.89s
% Output   : Refutation 0.69s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.08  % Problem  : MGT004+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.04/0.08  % Command  : sos-script %s
% 0.08/0.26  % Computer : n032.cluster.edu
% 0.08/0.26  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.08/0.26  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.08/0.26  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.08/0.26  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.08/0.26  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.08/0.26  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.08/0.26  % DateTime : Thu Jun  9 09:36:37 EDT 2022
% 0.08/0.26  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.08/0.28  ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.08/0.28  The process was started by sandbox2 on n032.cluster.edu,
% 0.08/0.28  Thu Jun  9 09:36:37 2022
% 0.08/0.28  The command was "./sos".  The process ID is 16783.
% 0.08/0.28  
% 0.08/0.28  set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.08/0.28  set(auto).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.08/0.28  clear(print_given).
% 0.08/0.28  
% 0.08/0.28  formula_list(usable).
% 0.08/0.28  
% 0.08/0.28  SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=11.
% 0.08/0.28  
% 0.08/0.28  This is a non-Horn set without equality.  The strategy
% 0.08/0.28  will be ordered hyper_res, ur_res, unit deletion, and
% 0.08/0.28  factoring, with satellites in sos and nuclei in usable.
% 0.08/0.28  
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: set(factor).
% 0.08/0.28     dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.08/0.28  
% 0.08/0.28  ------------> process usable:
% 0.08/0.28  
% 0.08/0.28  ------------> process sos:
% 0.08/0.28  
% 0.08/0.28  ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.12/0.39  SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.12/0.39  SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.12/0.39  number of clauses in intial UL: 33
% 0.12/0.39  number of clauses initially in problem: 39
% 0.12/0.39  percentage of clauses intially in UL: 84
% 0.12/0.39  percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 93
% 0.12/0.39  percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.12/0.39  absolute distinct symbol count: 15
% 0.12/0.39     distinct predicate count: 6
% 0.12/0.39     distinct function count: 2
% 0.12/0.39     distinct constant count: 7
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.12/0.39  
% 0.12/0.39  =========== start of search ===========
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  -------- PROOF -------- 
% 0.69/0.89  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.69/0.89  % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Model 3 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Model 4 [ 1 2 1086 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Model 5 (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Model 6 [ 1 4 899 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Model 7 [ 1 4 489 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  ----> UNIT CONFLICT at   0.50 sec ----> 47 [binary,46.1,8.1] {-} $F.
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Length of proof is 7.  Level of proof is 3.
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 0.69/0.89  % SZS status Theorem
% 0.69/0.89  % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  1 [] {+} -organization(A,B)|reliability(A,$f1(A,B),B).
% 0.69/0.89  2 [] {+} -organization(A,B)|accountability(A,$f2(A,B),B).
% 0.69/0.89  3 [] {+} -organization(A,B)| -organization(C,D)| -reliability(A,E,B)| -reliability(C,F,D)| -accountability(A,G,B)| -accountability(C,H,D)| -survival_chance(A,I,B)| -survival_chance(C,J,D)| -greater(F,E)| -greater(H,G)|greater(J,I).
% 0.69/0.89  4 [] {+} -organization(A,B)| -organization(A,C)| -reorganization(A,D,E)| -reliability(A,F,B)| -reliability(A,G,C)| -accountability(A,H,B)| -accountability(A,I,C)|greater(D,B)| -greater(C,B)|greater(C,E)|greater(F,G).
% 0.69/0.89  5 [] {+} -organization(A,B)| -organization(A,C)| -reorganization(A,D,E)| -reliability(A,F,B)| -reliability(A,G,C)| -accountability(A,H,B)| -accountability(A,I,C)|greater(D,B)| -greater(C,B)|greater(C,E)|greater(H,I).
% 0.69/0.89  6 [] {+} -greater($c2,$c4).
% 0.69/0.89  7 [] {+} -greater($c3,$c1).
% 0.69/0.89  8 [] {+} -greater($c6,$c5).
% 0.69/0.89  34 [] {+} organization($c7,$c4).
% 0.69/0.89  35 [] {+} organization($c7,$c3).
% 0.69/0.89  36 [] {+} reorganization($c7,$c2,$c1).
% 0.69/0.89  37 [] {+} survival_chance($c7,$c6,$c4).
% 0.69/0.89  38 [] {+} survival_chance($c7,$c5,$c3).
% 0.69/0.89  39 [] {+} greater($c3,$c4).
% 0.69/0.89  40 [hyper,34,2] {+} accountability($c7,$f2($c7,$c4),$c4).
% 0.69/0.89  41 [hyper,34,1] {+} reliability($c7,$f1($c7,$c4),$c4).
% 0.69/0.89  42 [hyper,35,2] {+} accountability($c7,$f2($c7,$c3),$c3).
% 0.69/0.89  43 [hyper,35,1] {+} reliability($c7,$f1($c7,$c3),$c3).
% 0.69/0.89  44 [hyper,43,5,34,35,36,41,40,42,39,unit_del,6,7] {-} greater($f2($c7,$c4),$f2($c7,$c3)).
% 0.69/0.89  45 [hyper,43,4,34,35,36,41,40,42,39,unit_del,6,7] {-} greater($f1($c7,$c4),$f1($c7,$c3)).
% 0.69/0.89  46 [hyper,45,3,35,34,43,41,42,40,38,37,44] {-} greater($c6,$c5).
% 0.69/0.89  47 [binary,46.1,8.1] {-} $F.
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.69/0.89  ------------ end of proof -------------
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  ============ end of search ============
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  true clauses given           4      (33.3%)
% 0.69/0.89  false clauses given          8
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89        FALSE     TRUE
% 0.69/0.89  tot:  0         0      (-nan% true)
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Model 7 [ 1 4 489 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 0.69/0.89  
% 0.69/0.89  Process 16783 finished Thu Jun  9 09:36:38 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------