TSTP Solution File: MGT015+1 by SOS---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SOS---2.0
% Problem  : MGT015+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : sos-script %s

% Computer : n025.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 22:25:48 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 1.35s 1.61s
% Output   : Refutation 1.35s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.11  % Problem  : MGT015+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.0.0.
% 0.11/0.12  % Command  : sos-script %s
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n025.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
% 0.18/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.18/0.33  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.18/0.33  % DateTime : Thu Jun  9 07:46:20 EDT 2022
% 0.18/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.18/0.35  ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.18/0.35  The process was started by sandbox2 on n025.cluster.edu,
% 0.18/0.35  Thu Jun  9 07:46:20 2022
% 0.18/0.35  The command was "./sos".  The process ID is 20845.
% 0.18/0.35  
% 0.18/0.35  set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.18/0.35  set(auto).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.18/0.35  clear(print_given).
% 0.18/0.35  
% 0.18/0.35  formula_list(usable).
% 0.18/0.35  
% 0.18/0.35  SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=1, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=13.
% 0.18/0.35  
% 0.18/0.35  This is a Horn set without equality.  The strategy will
% 0.18/0.35  be hyperresolution, with satellites in sos and nuclei
% 0.18/0.35  in usable.
% 0.18/0.35  
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.18/0.35     dependent: clear(order_hyper).
% 0.18/0.35  
% 0.18/0.35  ------------> process usable:
% 0.18/0.35  
% 0.18/0.35  ------------> process sos:
% 0.18/0.35  
% 0.18/0.35  ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.18/0.43  SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.18/0.43  SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.18/0.43  number of clauses in intial UL: 4
% 0.18/0.43  number of clauses initially in problem: 16
% 0.18/0.43  percentage of clauses intially in UL: 25
% 0.18/0.43  percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 58
% 0.18/0.43  percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.18/0.43  absolute distinct symbol count: 17
% 0.18/0.43     distinct predicate count: 7
% 0.18/0.43     distinct function count: 1
% 0.18/0.43     distinct constant count: 9
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  
% 0.18/0.43  =========== start of search ===========
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  -------- PROOF -------- 
% 1.35/1.61  % SZS status Theorem
% 1.35/1.61  % SZS output start Refutation
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 3 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 4 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 5 [ 1 12 1767 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 6 [ 1 5 1302 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 7 [ 1 5 1247 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 8 [ 2 8 1569 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 9 [ 1 2 304 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 10 [ 1 3 519 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 11 [ 1 3 782 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  ----> UNIT CONFLICT at   1.09 sec ----> 22 [binary,21.1,4.1] {+} $F.
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Length of proof is 4.  Level of proof is 3.
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 1.35/1.61  % SZS status Theorem
% 1.35/1.61  % SZS output start Refutation
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  1 [] {+} -organization(A,B)|inertia(A,$f1(A,B),B).
% 1.35/1.61  2 [] {+} -organization(A,B)| -organization(C,D)| -class(A,E,B)| -class(C,E,D)| -complexity(A,F,B)| -complexity(C,G,D)| -inertia(A,H,B)| -inertia(C,I,D)| -greater(G,F)|greater(I,H).
% 1.35/1.61  3 [] {+} -organization(A,B)| -organization(C,B)| -organization(C,D)| -class(A,E,B)| -class(C,E,B)| -reorganization(A,B,F)| -reorganization(C,B,D)| -reorganization_type(A,G,B)| -reorganization_type(C,G,B)| -inertia(A,H,B)| -inertia(C,I,B)| -greater(I,H)|greater(D,F).
% 1.35/1.61  4 [] {+} -greater($c1,$c2).
% 1.35/1.61  5 [] {+} organization($c9,$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  6 [] {+} organization($c8,$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  7 [] {+} organization($c8,$c1).
% 1.35/1.61  8 [] {+} class($c9,$c6,$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  9 [] {+} class($c8,$c6,$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  10 [] {+} reorganization($c9,$c3,$c2).
% 1.35/1.61  11 [] {+} reorganization($c8,$c3,$c1).
% 1.35/1.61  12 [] {+} reorganization_type($c9,$c7,$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  13 [] {+} reorganization_type($c8,$c7,$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  14 [] {+} complexity($c9,$c5,$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  15 [] {+} complexity($c8,$c4,$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  16 [] {+} greater($c4,$c5).
% 1.35/1.61  17 [hyper,5,1] {+} inertia($c9,$f1($c9,$c3),$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  19 [hyper,6,1] {+} inertia($c8,$f1($c8,$c3),$c3).
% 1.35/1.61  20 [hyper,19,2,5,6,8,9,14,15,17,16] {-} greater($f1($c8,$c3),$f1($c9,$c3)).
% 1.35/1.61  21 [hyper,20,3,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,17,19] {-} greater($c1,$c2).
% 1.35/1.61  22 [binary,21.1,4.1] {+} $F.
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  % SZS output end Refutation
% 1.35/1.61  ------------ end of proof -------------
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  ============ end of search ============
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  true clauses given           4      (26.7%)
% 1.35/1.61  false clauses given         11
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61        FALSE     TRUE
% 1.35/1.61     6  0         1
% 1.35/1.61  tot:  0         1      (100.0% true)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Model 11 [ 1 3 782 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 1.35/1.61  
% 1.35/1.61  Process 20845 finished Thu Jun  9 07:46:21 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------