TSTP Solution File: SWB003+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWB003+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v5.2.0.
% 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 19:01:53 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 1.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 7 ( 7 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 7 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 3 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-3 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 3 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 4 ( 1 sgn 1 !; 2 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(testcase_conclusion_fullish_003_Blank_Nodes_for_Literals,conjecture,
? [X42] : iext(uri_ex_p,uri_ex_s,X42),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',testcase_conclusion_fullish_003_Blank_Nodes_for_Literals) ).
fof(testcase_premise_fullish_003_Blank_Nodes_for_Literals,axiom,
iext(uri_ex_p,uri_ex_s,literal_plain(dat_str_foo)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',testcase_premise_fullish_003_Blank_Nodes_for_Literals) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ? [X42] : iext(uri_ex_p,uri_ex_s,X42),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[testcase_conclusion_fullish_003_Blank_Nodes_for_Literals]) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
! [X43] : ~ iext(uri_ex_p,uri_ex_s,X43),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,plain,
iext(uri_ex_p,uri_ex_s,literal_plain(dat_str_foo)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[testcase_premise_fullish_003_Blank_Nodes_for_Literals]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
~ iext(uri_ex_p,uri_ex_s,X1),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,plain,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[c_0_4,c_0_5]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.11 % Problem : SWB003+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v5.2.0.
% 0.07/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n027.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
% 0.12/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.33 % DateTime : Wed Jun 1 09:20:18 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.25/1.44 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.44 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.25/1.44 # Preprocessing time : 0.026 s
% 0.25/1.44
% 0.25/1.44 # Failure: Out of unprocessed clauses!
% 0.25/1.44 # OLD status GaveUp
% 0.25/1.44 # Parsed axioms : 560
% 0.25/1.44 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 559
% 0.25/1.44 # Initial clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Initial clauses in saturation : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Processed clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # ...remaining for further processing : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Generated clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Paramodulations : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of processed clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.44 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Termbank termtop insertions : 7015
% 0.25/1.44
% 0.25/1.44 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.44 # User time : 0.023 s
% 0.25/1.44 # System time : 0.003 s
% 0.25/1.44 # Total time : 0.026 s
% 0.25/1.44 # Maximum resident set size: 3588 pages
% 0.25/1.44 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_f171197f65f27d1ba69648a20c844832c84a5dd7 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.44 # Preprocessing time : 0.089 s
% 0.25/1.44
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof found!
% 0.25/1.44 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/1.44 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object total steps : 7
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object clause steps : 3
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object formula steps : 4
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object conjectures : 4
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object clause conjectures : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object initial clauses used : 2
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object initial formulas used : 2
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object generating inferences : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.44 # Parsed axioms : 560
% 0.25/1.44 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Initial clauses : 1268
% 0.25/1.44 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 111
% 0.25/1.44 # Initial clauses in saturation : 1157
% 0.25/1.44 # Processed clauses : 315
% 0.25/1.44 # ...of these trivial : 3
% 0.25/1.44 # ...subsumed : 13
% 0.25/1.44 # ...remaining for further processing : 298
% 0.25/1.44 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Generated clauses : 756
% 0.25/1.44 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 747
% 0.25/1.44 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Paramodulations : 755
% 0.25/1.44 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Equation resolutions : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of processed clauses : 297
% 0.25/1.44 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 199
% 0.25/1.44 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Negative unit clauses : 4
% 0.25/1.44 # Non-unit-clauses : 94
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1589
% 0.25/1.44 # ...number of literals in the above : 5693
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.44 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2076
% 0.25/1.44 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1347
% 0.25/1.44 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 13
% 0.25/1.44 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 834
% 0.25/1.44 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # BW rewrite match attempts : 3
% 0.25/1.44 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/1.44 # Termbank termtop insertions : 88370
% 0.25/1.44
% 0.25/1.44 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.44 # User time : 0.097 s
% 0.25/1.44 # System time : 0.005 s
% 0.25/1.44 # Total time : 0.102 s
% 0.25/1.44 # Maximum resident set size: 8160 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------