TSTP Solution File: SEU264+2 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : SEU264+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n007.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 09:18:25 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.26s 1.45s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    6
%            Number of leaves      :    4
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   20 (   6 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   46 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    4 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   43 (  17   ~;  13   |;   5   &)
%                                         (   0 <=>;   8  =>;   0  <=;   0 <~>)
%            Maximal formula depth :    8 (   4 avg)
%            Maximal term depth    :    2 (   1 avg)
%            Number of predicates  :    3 (   2 usr;   1 prp; 0-3 aty)
%            Number of functors    :    6 (   6 usr;   4 con; 0-1 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   40 (   2 sgn  28   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(t16_relset_1,conjecture,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
      ( relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X1)
     => ( subset(X1,X2)
       => relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t16_relset_1) ).

fof(t14_relset_1,lemma,
    ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
      ( relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X1)
     => ( subset(relation_rng(X4),X2)
       => relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t14_relset_1) ).

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(t12_relset_1,lemma,
    ! [X1,X2,X3] :
      ( relation_of2_as_subset(X3,X1,X2)
     => ( subset(relation_dom(X3),X1)
        & subset(relation_rng(X3),X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',t12_relset_1) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1,X2,X3,X4] :
        ( relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X1)
       => ( subset(X1,X2)
         => relation_of2_as_subset(X4,X3,X2) ) ),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[t16_relset_1]) ).

fof(c_0_5,lemma,
    ! [X5,X6,X7,X8] :
      ( ~ relation_of2_as_subset(X8,X7,X5)
      | ~ subset(relation_rng(X8),X6)
      | relation_of2_as_subset(X8,X7,X6) ),
    inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t14_relset_1])]) ).

fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
    ( relation_of2_as_subset(esk4_0,esk3_0,esk1_0)
    & subset(esk1_0,esk2_0)
    & ~ relation_of2_as_subset(esk4_0,esk3_0,esk2_0) ),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,lemma,
    ( relation_of2_as_subset(X1,X2,X3)
    | ~ subset(relation_rng(X1),X3)
    | ~ relation_of2_as_subset(X1,X2,X4) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    relation_of2_as_subset(esk4_0,esk3_0,esk1_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

fof(c_0_9,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_10,lemma,
    ! [X4,X5,X6] :
      ( ( subset(relation_dom(X6),X4)
        | ~ relation_of2_as_subset(X6,X4,X5) )
      & ( subset(relation_rng(X6),X5)
        | ~ relation_of2_as_subset(X6,X4,X5) ) ),
    inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[t12_relset_1])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ relation_of2_as_subset(esk4_0,esk3_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
    ( relation_of2_as_subset(esk4_0,esk3_0,X1)
    | ~ subset(relation_rng(esk4_0),X1) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,lemma,
    ( subset(X1,X2)
    | ~ subset(X3,X2)
    | ~ subset(X1,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_9]) ).

cnf(c_0_14,negated_conjecture,
    subset(esk1_0,esk2_0),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).

cnf(c_0_15,lemma,
    ( subset(relation_rng(X1),X3)
    | ~ relation_of2_as_subset(X1,X2,X3) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_16,negated_conjecture,
    ~ subset(relation_rng(esk4_0),esk2_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).

cnf(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
    ( subset(X1,esk2_0)
    | ~ subset(X1,esk1_0) ),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_13,c_0_14]) ).

cnf(c_0_18,negated_conjecture,
    subset(relation_rng(esk4_0),esk1_0),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_15,c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_16,c_0_17]),c_0_18])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.13  % Problem  : SEU264+2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v3.3.0.
% 0.03/0.13  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.35  % Computer : n007.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.13/0.35  % DateTime : Mon Jun 20 13:07:45 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35  % 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       : 0.032 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             : 20
% 0.26/1.45  # Proof object clause steps            : 11
% 0.26/1.45  # Proof object formula steps           : 9
% 0.26/1.45  # Proof object conjectures             : 11
% 0.26/1.45  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 8
% 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   : 4
% 0.26/1.45  # Proof object generating inferences   : 5
% 0.26/1.45  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 2
% 0.26/1.45  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.26/1.45  # Parsed axioms                        : 331
% 0.26/1.45  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 230
% 0.26/1.45  # Initial clauses                      : 188
% 0.26/1.45  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 3
% 0.26/1.45  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 185
% 0.26/1.45  # Processed clauses                    : 215
% 0.26/1.45  # ...of these trivial                  : 4
% 0.26/1.45  # ...subsumed                          : 10
% 0.26/1.45  # ...remaining for further processing  : 201
% 0.26/1.45  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 15
% 0.26/1.45  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.26/1.45  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.26/1.45  # Backward-rewritten                   : 32
% 0.26/1.45  # Generated clauses                    : 935
% 0.26/1.45  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 828
% 0.26/1.45  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 4
% 0.26/1.45  # Paramodulations                      : 897
% 0.26/1.45  # Factorizations                       : 8
% 0.26/1.45  # Equation resolutions                 : 30
% 0.26/1.45  # Current number of processed clauses  : 167
% 0.26/1.45  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 26
% 0.26/1.45  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.26/1.45  #    Negative unit clauses             : 6
% 0.26/1.45  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 134
% 0.26/1.45  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 657
% 0.26/1.45  # ...number of literals in the above   : 2343
% 0.26/1.45  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.26/1.45  # Current number of archived clauses   : 33
% 0.26/1.45  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2897
% 0.26/1.45  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1474
% 0.26/1.45  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 14
% 0.26/1.45  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 184
% 0.26/1.45  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.26/1.45  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 38
% 0.26/1.45  # BW rewrite match successes           : 13
% 0.26/1.45  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.26/1.45  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.26/1.45  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 24530
% 0.26/1.45  
% 0.26/1.45  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/1.45  # User time                : 0.058 s
% 0.26/1.45  # System time              : 0.002 s
% 0.26/1.45  # Total time               : 0.060 s
% 0.26/1.45  # Maximum resident set size: 4512 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------