TSTP Solution File: SET992+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SET992+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n027.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 : Tue Jul 19 00:55:55 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.21s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 11
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 36 ( 8 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 151 ( 79 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 32 ( 4 avg)
% Number of connectives : 182 ( 67 ~; 91 |; 15 &)
% ( 4 <=>; 5 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 18 ( 5 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 5 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 5 ( 3 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 10 ( 10 usr; 2 con; 0-3 aty)
% Number of variables : 67 ( 5 sgn 23 !; 1 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(d5_funct_1,axiom,
! [X1] :
( ( relation(X1)
& function(X1) )
=> ! [X2] :
( X2 = relation_rng(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> ? [X4] :
( in(X4,relation_dom(X1))
& X3 = apply(X1,X4) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p',d5_funct_1) ).
fof(d1_tarski,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( X2 = singleton(X1)
<=> ! [X3] :
( in(X3,X2)
<=> X3 = X1 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p',d1_tarski) ).
fof(t14_funct_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( relation(X2)
& function(X2) )
=> ( relation_dom(X2) = singleton(X1)
=> relation_rng(X2) = singleton(apply(X2,X1)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p',t14_funct_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X5,X6,X7,X7,X9,X6,X11] :
( ( in(esk4_3(X5,X6,X7),relation_dom(X5))
| ~ in(X7,X6)
| X6 != relation_rng(X5)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) )
& ( X7 = apply(X5,esk4_3(X5,X6,X7))
| ~ in(X7,X6)
| X6 != relation_rng(X5)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) )
& ( ~ in(X9,relation_dom(X5))
| X7 != apply(X5,X9)
| in(X7,X6)
| X6 != relation_rng(X5)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) )
& ( ~ in(esk5_2(X5,X6),X6)
| ~ in(X11,relation_dom(X5))
| esk5_2(X5,X6) != apply(X5,X11)
| X6 = relation_rng(X5)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) )
& ( in(esk6_2(X5,X6),relation_dom(X5))
| in(esk5_2(X5,X6),X6)
| X6 = relation_rng(X5)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) )
& ( esk5_2(X5,X6) = apply(X5,esk6_2(X5,X6))
| in(esk5_2(X5,X6),X6)
| X6 = relation_rng(X5)
| ~ relation(X5)
| ~ function(X5) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d5_funct_1])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6,X6,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ in(X6,X5)
| X6 = X4
| X5 != singleton(X4) )
& ( X6 != X4
| in(X6,X5)
| X5 != singleton(X4) )
& ( ~ in(esk3_2(X4,X5),X5)
| esk3_2(X4,X5) != X4
| X5 = singleton(X4) )
& ( in(esk3_2(X4,X5),X5)
| esk3_2(X4,X5) = X4
| X5 = singleton(X4) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[d1_tarski])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( in(esk4_3(X1,X2,X3),relation_dom(X1))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| X2 != relation_rng(X1)
| ~ in(X3,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
( X1 = singleton(X2)
| esk3_2(X2,X1) = X2
| in(esk3_2(X2,X1),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2] :
( ( relation(X2)
& function(X2) )
=> ( relation_dom(X2) = singleton(X1)
=> relation_rng(X2) = singleton(apply(X2,X1)) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t14_funct_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( esk3_2(X1,X2) = X1
| X2 = singleton(X1)
| in(esk4_3(X3,X2,esk3_2(X1,X2)),relation_dom(X3))
| X2 != relation_rng(X3)
| ~ relation(X3)
| ~ function(X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]) ).
fof(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
( relation(esk2_0)
& function(esk2_0)
& relation_dom(esk2_0) = singleton(esk1_0)
& relation_rng(esk2_0) != singleton(apply(esk2_0,esk1_0)) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_7])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
( X3 = apply(X1,esk4_3(X1,X2,X3))
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| X2 != relation_rng(X1)
| ~ in(X3,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
( esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(X2)) = X1
| relation_rng(X2) = singleton(X1)
| in(esk4_3(X2,relation_rng(X2),esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(X2))),relation_dom(X2))
| ~ relation(X2)
| ~ function(X2) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
relation(esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
function(esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
( in(X3,X1)
| X1 != singleton(X2)
| X3 != X2 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
( apply(X1,esk4_3(X1,X2,esk3_2(X3,X2))) = esk3_2(X3,X2)
| esk3_2(X3,X2) = X3
| X2 = singleton(X3)
| X2 != relation_rng(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ function(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
( X3 = X2
| X1 != singleton(X2)
| ~ in(X3,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
( esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0)) = X1
| relation_rng(esk2_0) = singleton(X1)
| in(esk4_3(esk2_0,relation_rng(esk2_0),esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0))),relation_dom(esk2_0)) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
( in(X1,X2)
| X2 != singleton(X1) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_14]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
relation_dom(esk2_0) = singleton(esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
( apply(X1,esk4_3(X1,relation_rng(X1),esk3_2(X2,relation_rng(X1)))) = esk3_2(X2,relation_rng(X1))
| esk3_2(X2,relation_rng(X1)) = X2
| relation_rng(X1) = singleton(X2)
| ~ relation(X1)
| ~ function(X1) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_15]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
( X1 = esk4_3(esk2_0,relation_rng(esk2_0),esk3_2(X2,relation_rng(esk2_0)))
| esk3_2(X2,relation_rng(esk2_0)) = X2
| relation_rng(esk2_0) = singleton(X2)
| relation_dom(esk2_0) != singleton(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_22,negated_conjecture,
( in(esk1_0,X1)
| X1 != relation_dom(esk2_0) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_23,negated_conjecture,
( apply(esk2_0,esk4_3(esk2_0,relation_rng(esk2_0),esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0)))) = esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0))
| esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0)) = X1
| relation_rng(esk2_0) = singleton(X1) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_20,c_0_12]),c_0_13])]) ).
cnf(c_0_24,negated_conjecture,
( esk4_3(esk2_0,relation_rng(esk2_0),esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0))) = esk1_0
| esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0)) = X1
| relation_rng(esk2_0) = singleton(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_21,c_0_19]) ).
cnf(c_0_25,plain,
( in(X3,X2)
| ~ function(X1)
| ~ relation(X1)
| X2 != relation_rng(X1)
| X3 != apply(X1,X4)
| ~ in(X4,relation_dom(X1)) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_26,negated_conjecture,
in(esk1_0,relation_dom(esk2_0)),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_22]) ).
cnf(c_0_27,negated_conjecture,
( apply(esk2_0,esk1_0) = esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0))
| esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0)) = X1
| relation_rng(esk2_0) = singleton(X1) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_23,c_0_24]) ).
cnf(c_0_28,negated_conjecture,
( in(X1,X2)
| X1 != apply(esk2_0,esk1_0)
| X2 != relation_rng(esk2_0) ),
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_25,c_0_26]),c_0_12]),c_0_13])]) ).
cnf(c_0_29,negated_conjecture,
( apply(esk2_0,esk1_0) = esk3_2(X1,relation_rng(esk2_0))
| relation_rng(esk2_0) = singleton(X1)
| X1 != apply(esk2_0,esk1_0) ),
inference(ef,[status(thm)],[c_0_27]) ).
cnf(c_0_30,negated_conjecture,
relation_rng(esk2_0) != singleton(apply(esk2_0,esk1_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).
cnf(c_0_31,negated_conjecture,
( in(apply(esk2_0,esk1_0),X1)
| X1 != relation_rng(esk2_0) ),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_28]) ).
cnf(c_0_32,plain,
( X1 = singleton(X2)
| esk3_2(X2,X1) != X2
| ~ in(esk3_2(X2,X1),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_33,negated_conjecture,
esk3_2(apply(esk2_0,esk1_0),relation_rng(esk2_0)) = apply(esk2_0,esk1_0),
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_29]),c_0_30]) ).
cnf(c_0_34,negated_conjecture,
in(apply(esk2_0,esk1_0),relation_rng(esk2_0)),
inference(er,[status(thm)],[c_0_31]) ).
cnf(c_0_35,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_32,c_0_33]),c_0_34])]),c_0_30]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.12 % Problem : SET992+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v4.0.0.
% 0.04/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.32 % Computer : n027.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.32 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.32 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.32 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.32 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.32 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.32 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.32 % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 05:46:17 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.32 % CPUTime :
% 0.21/1.40 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_2d86bd69119e7e9cc4417c0ee581499eaf828bb2 for 23 seconds:
% 0.21/1.40 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,,1.1,,02,500,1.0)
% 0.21/1.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.016 s
% 0.21/1.40
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof found!
% 0.21/1.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/1.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object total steps : 36
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object clause steps : 29
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object formula steps : 7
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object conjectures : 20
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object clause conjectures : 17
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object initial clauses used : 11
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object initial formulas used : 3
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object generating inferences : 17
% 0.21/1.40 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 12
% 0.21/1.40 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.21/1.40 # Parsed axioms : 34
% 0.21/1.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 15
% 0.21/1.40 # Initial clauses : 36
% 0.21/1.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 36
% 0.21/1.40 # Processed clauses : 939
% 0.21/1.40 # ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.21/1.40 # ...subsumed : 413
% 0.21/1.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 523
% 0.21/1.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 4
% 0.21/1.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Backward-subsumed : 62
% 0.21/1.40 # Backward-rewritten : 22
% 0.21/1.40 # Generated clauses : 2330
% 0.21/1.40 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 2143
% 0.21/1.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 258
% 0.21/1.40 # Paramodulations : 2153
% 0.21/1.40 # Factorizations : 24
% 0.21/1.40 # Equation resolutions : 153
% 0.21/1.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 438
% 0.21/1.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 17
% 0.21/1.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Negative unit clauses : 9
% 0.21/1.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 412
% 0.21/1.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 891
% 0.21/1.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 4414
% 0.21/1.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 84
% 0.21/1.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 32465
% 0.21/1.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 11398
% 0.21/1.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 694
% 0.21/1.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 127
% 0.21/1.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 4
% 0.21/1.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 4
% 0.21/1.40 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.21/1.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 57812
% 0.21/1.40
% 0.21/1.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/1.40 # User time : 0.116 s
% 0.21/1.40 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.21/1.40 # Total time : 0.118 s
% 0.21/1.40 # Maximum resident set size: 4584 pages
% 0.21/23.40 eprover: CPU time limit exceeded, terminating
% 0.21/23.40 eprover: CPU time limit exceeded, terminating
% 0.21/23.41 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.41 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.42 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.43 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.44 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.45 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.21/23.46 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.21/23.46 eprover: No such file or directory
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------