TSTP Solution File: SEU167+2 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SEU167+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n010.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 09:17:23 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.26s 1.45s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 16 ( 4 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 39 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 38 ( 15 ~; 12 |; 7 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 4 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 5 ( 5 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 38 ( 1 sgn 21 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t1_xboole_1,lemma,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( ( subset(X1,X2)
& subset(X2,X3) )
=> subset(X1,X3) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t1_xboole_1) ).
fof(t118_zfmisc_1,lemma,
! [X1,X2,X3] :
( subset(X1,X2)
=> ( subset(cartesian_product2(X1,X3),cartesian_product2(X2,X3))
& subset(cartesian_product2(X3,X1),cartesian_product2(X3,X2)) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t118_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(t119_zfmisc_1,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( subset(X1,X2)
& subset(X3,X4) )
=> subset(cartesian_product2(X1,X3),cartesian_product2(X2,X4)) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t119_zfmisc_1) ).
fof(c_0_3,lemma,
! [X4,X5,X6] :
( ~ subset(X4,X5)
| ~ subset(X5,X6)
| subset(X4,X6) ),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t1_xboole_1])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,lemma,
! [X4,X5,X6,X6] :
( ( subset(cartesian_product2(X4,X6),cartesian_product2(X5,X6))
| ~ subset(X4,X5) )
& ( subset(cartesian_product2(X6,X4),cartesian_product2(X6,X5))
| ~ subset(X4,X5) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t118_zfmisc_1])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
( ( subset(X1,X2)
& subset(X3,X4) )
=> subset(cartesian_product2(X1,X3),cartesian_product2(X2,X4)) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t119_zfmisc_1]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,lemma,
( subset(X1,X2)
| ~ subset(X3,X2)
| ~ subset(X1,X3) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,lemma,
( subset(cartesian_product2(X3,X1),cartesian_product2(X3,X2))
| ~ subset(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
( subset(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& subset(esk3_0,esk4_0)
& ~ subset(cartesian_product2(esk1_0,esk3_0),cartesian_product2(esk2_0,esk4_0)) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_5])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,lemma,
( subset(X1,cartesian_product2(X2,X3))
| ~ subset(X1,cartesian_product2(X2,X4))
| ~ subset(X4,X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,lemma,
( subset(cartesian_product2(X1,X3),cartesian_product2(X2,X3))
| ~ subset(X1,X2) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(cartesian_product2(esk1_0,esk3_0),cartesian_product2(esk2_0,esk4_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,lemma,
( subset(cartesian_product2(X1,X2),cartesian_product2(X3,X4))
| ~ subset(X2,X4)
| ~ subset(X1,X3) ),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
subset(esk3_0,esk4_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
subset(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]),c_0_13]),c_0_14])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.08/0.13 % Problem : SEU167+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.08/0.14 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n010.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Mon Jun 20 09:53:52 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.26/1.45 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.26/1.45 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.26/1.45 # Preprocessing time : 0.022 s
% 0.26/1.45
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof found!
% 0.26/1.45 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/1.45 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object total steps : 16
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object clause steps : 9
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object formula steps : 7
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object conjectures : 7
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object clause conjectures : 4
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object initial formulas used : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object generating inferences : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.26/1.45 # Parsed axioms : 97
% 0.26/1.45 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 36
% 0.26/1.45 # Initial clauses : 111
% 0.26/1.45 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 3
% 0.26/1.45 # Initial clauses in saturation : 108
% 0.26/1.45 # Processed clauses : 2755
% 0.26/1.45 # ...of these trivial : 83
% 0.26/1.45 # ...subsumed : 1999
% 0.26/1.45 # ...remaining for further processing : 673
% 0.26/1.45 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 169
% 0.26/1.45 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Backward-subsumed : 82
% 0.26/1.45 # Backward-rewritten : 19
% 0.26/1.45 # Generated clauses : 14029
% 0.26/1.45 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 11955
% 0.26/1.45 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 1123
% 0.26/1.45 # Paramodulations : 13741
% 0.26/1.45 # Factorizations : 68
% 0.26/1.45 # Equation resolutions : 220
% 0.26/1.45 # Current number of processed clauses : 567
% 0.26/1.45 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 46
% 0.26/1.45 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 2
% 0.26/1.45 # Negative unit clauses : 24
% 0.26/1.45 # Non-unit-clauses : 495
% 0.26/1.45 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 8149
% 0.26/1.45 # ...number of literals in the above : 29910
% 0.26/1.45 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Current number of archived clauses : 104
% 0.26/1.45 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 87399
% 0.26/1.45 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 69222
% 0.26/1.45 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 3020
% 0.26/1.45 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1939
% 0.26/1.45 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # BW rewrite match attempts : 40
% 0.26/1.45 # BW rewrite match successes : 12
% 0.26/1.45 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/1.45 # Termbank termtop insertions : 136068
% 0.26/1.45
% 0.26/1.45 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/1.45 # User time : 0.258 s
% 0.26/1.45 # System time : 0.008 s
% 0.26/1.45 # Total time : 0.267 s
% 0.26/1.45 # Maximum resident set size: 10868 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------