TSTP Solution File: SWC294-1 by Gandalf---c-2.6
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : Gandalf---c-2.6
% Problem : SWC294-1 : TPTP v3.4.2. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : add_equality:r
% Format : otter:hypothesis:set(auto),clear(print_given)
% Command : gandalf-wrapper -time %d %s
% Computer : art10.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 unknown
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2793MHz
% Memory : 1000MB
% OS : Linux 2.4.22-21mdk-i686-up-4GB
% CPULimit : 600s
% Result : Unsatisfiable 20.0s
% Output : Assurance 20.0s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----NO SOLUTION OUTPUT BY SYSTEM
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
%
% Gandalf c-2.6 r1 starting to prove: /home/graph/tptp/TSTP/PreparedTPTP/otter:hypothesis:set(auto),clear(print_given)---add_equality:r/SWC/SWC294-1+eq_r.in
% Using automatic strategy selection.
% Time limit in seconds: 600
%
% prove-all-passes started
%
% detected problem class: neq
% detected subclass: big
%
% strategies selected:
% (hyper 28 #f 5 19)
% (binary-unit 28 #f 5 19)
% (binary-double 11 #f 5 19)
% (binary-double 17 #f)
% (binary-double 17 #t)
% (binary 87 #t 5 19)
% (binary-order 28 #f 5 19)
% (binary-posweight-order 58 #f)
% (binary-posweight-lex-big-order 28 #f)
% (binary-posweight-lex-small-order 11 #f)
% (binary-order-sos 28 #t)
% (binary-unit-uniteq 28 #f)
% (binary-weightorder 28 #f)
% (binary-weightorder-sos 17 #f)
% (binary-order 28 #f)
% (hyper-order 17 #f)
% (binary 141 #t)
%
%
% SOS clause
% singleton^p(sk3) | -neq(sk4,nil).
% was split for some strategies as:
% singleton^p(sk3).
% -neq(sk4,nil).
%
% ********* EMPTY CLAUSE DERIVED *********
%
%
% timer checkpoints: c(195,40,0,390,0,1,35092,4,1134,36599,5,1302,36600,1,1303,36600,50,1305,36600,40,1305,36795,0,1316,80161,3,1969,99180,4,2295)
%
%
% START OF PROOF
% 36604 [] strictordered^p(nil).
% 36609 [] ss^list(nil).
% 36648 [] ss^item(skaf44(X)).
% 36667 [] strictordered^p(cons(X,nil)) | -ss^item(X).
% 36675 [] equal(app(nil,X),X) | -ss^list(X).
% 36680 [] -equal(nil,X) | segment^p(nil,X) | -ss^list(X).
% 36681 [] -segment^p(nil,X) | equal(nil,X) | -ss^list(X).
% 36683 [] -rearseg^p(nil,X) | equal(nil,X) | -ss^list(X).
% 36701 [] neq(X,Y) | equal(X,Y) | -ss^list(Y) | -ss^list(X).
% 36702 [] equal(cons(skaf44(X),nil),X) | -singleton^p(X) | -ss^list(X).
% 36744 [] -equal(app(X,Y),Z) | rearseg^p(Z,Y) | -ss^list(Z) | -ss^list(Y) | -ss^list(X).
% 36787 [] ss^list(sk1).
% 36788 [] ss^list(sk2).
% 36791 [] equal(sk2,sk4).
% 36792 [] equal(sk1,sk3).
% 36793 [] segment^p(sk4,sk3).
% 36794 [] -strictordered^p(sk1).
% 36795 [] -neq(sk4,nil) | singleton^p(sk3).
% 36836 [input:36744,factor:factor] -equal(app(X,Y),X) | rearseg^p(X,Y) | -ss^list(X) | -ss^list(Y).
% 37562 [para:36791.1.2,36793.1.1] segment^p(sk2,sk3).
% 37565 [para:36791.1.2,36795.1.1] -neq(sk2,nil) | singleton^p(sk3).
% 37567 [para:36792.1.2,37562.1.2] segment^p(sk2,sk1).
% 37569 [para:36792.1.2,37565.2.1] -neq(sk2,nil) | singleton^p(sk1).
% 37885 [binary:36648,36667.2] strictordered^p(cons(skaf44(X),nil)).
% 38045 [binary:36788,36675.2] equal(app(nil,sk2),sk2).
% 38111 [binary:36787,36681.3] -segment^p(nil,sk1) | equal(nil,sk1).
% 38112 [binary:36788,36681.3] -segment^p(nil,sk2) | equal(nil,sk2).
% 46763 [para:36702.1.1,37885.1.1] -singleton^p(X) | -ss^list(X) | strictordered^p(X).
% 50398 [para:38111.2.2,36794.1.1,cut:36604] -segment^p(nil,sk1).
% 61450 [para:38112.2.2,37567.1.1,cut:50398] -segment^p(nil,sk2).
% 61451 [binary:36680.2,61450,cut:36788] -equal(nil,sk2).
% 61676 [binary:36683.2,61451,cut:36788] -rearseg^p(nil,sk2).
% 63142 [para:38045.1.1,36836.1.1,cut:61676,cut:36609,cut:36788] -equal(sk2,nil).
% 63287 [binary:36701.2,63142,cut:36609,cut:36788] neq(sk2,nil).
% 63552 [binary:37569,63287] singleton^p(sk1).
% 109499 [binary:63552,46763,cut:36787,cut:36794] contradiction
% END OF PROOF
%
% Proof found by the following strategy:
%
% using binary resolution
% not using sos strategy
% using unit paramodulation strategy
% using unit strategy
% using dynamic demodulation
% using ordered paramodulation
% using kb ordering for equality
% preferring bigger arities for lex ordering
% using clause demodulation
% clause length limited to 19
% clause depth limited to 5
% seconds given: 13
%
%
% old unit clauses discarded
%
% ***GANDALF_FOUND_A_REFUTATION***
%
% Global statistics over all passes:
%
% given clauses: 1297
% derived clauses: 147063
% kept clauses: 82267
% kept size sum: 0
% kept mid-nuclei: 21632
% kept new demods: 19494
% forw unit-subs: 16587
% forw double-subs: 4662
% forw overdouble-subs: 2644
% backward subs: 24
% fast unit cutoff: 15715
% full unit cutoff: 0
% dbl unit cutoff: 301
% real runtime : 24.83
% process. runtime: 24.82
% specific non-discr-tree subsumption statistics:
% tried: 694720
% length fails: 17471
% strength fails: 53084
% predlist fails: 502275
% aux str. fails: 16850
% by-lit fails: 10676
% full subs tried: 75979
% full subs fail: 73080
%
% ; program args: ("/home/graph/tptp/Systems/Gandalf---c-2.6/gandalf" "-time" "600" "/home/graph/tptp/TSTP/PreparedTPTP/otter:hypothesis:set(auto),clear(print_given)---add_equality:r/SWC/SWC294-1+eq_r.in")
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------