TSTP Solution File: SWC406+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SWC406+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n028.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 20:28:33 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 1.43s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 1
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 11 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 90 ( 14 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 34 ( 8 avg)
% Number of connectives : 118 ( 39 ~; 39 |; 28 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 12 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 23 ( 7 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 6 ( 4 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 5 con; 0-1 aty)
% Number of variables : 20 ( 0 sgn 14 !; 4 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(co1,conjecture,
! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ? [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
& ( ( ~ memberP(X3,X5)
& ! [X6] :
( ssItem(X6)
=> ( ~ memberP(X4,X6)
| ~ leq(X6,X5)
| X5 = X6 ) )
& memberP(X4,X5) )
| ( memberP(X3,X5)
& ( ~ memberP(X4,X5)
| ? [X6] :
( ssItem(X6)
& X5 != X6
& memberP(X4,X6)
& leq(X6,X5) ) ) ) ) )
| ! [X7] :
( ssItem(X7)
=> ( ~ memberP(X1,X7)
| memberP(X2,X7) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',co1) ).
fof(c_0_1,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] :
( ssList(X1)
=> ! [X2] :
( ssList(X2)
=> ! [X3] :
( ssList(X3)
=> ! [X4] :
( ssList(X4)
=> ( X2 != X4
| X1 != X3
| ? [X5] :
( ssItem(X5)
& ( ( ~ memberP(X3,X5)
& ! [X6] :
( ssItem(X6)
=> ( ~ memberP(X4,X6)
| ~ leq(X6,X5)
| X5 = X6 ) )
& memberP(X4,X5) )
| ( memberP(X3,X5)
& ( ~ memberP(X4,X5)
| ? [X6] :
( ssItem(X6)
& X5 != X6
& memberP(X4,X6)
& leq(X6,X5) ) ) ) ) )
| ! [X7] :
( ssItem(X7)
=> ( ~ memberP(X1,X7)
| memberP(X2,X7) ) ) ) ) ) ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[co1]) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
! [X12,X14] :
( ssList(esk1_0)
& ssList(esk2_0)
& ssList(esk3_0)
& ssList(esk4_0)
& esk2_0 = esk4_0
& esk1_0 = esk3_0
& ( ssItem(esk5_1(X12))
| memberP(esk3_0,X12)
| ~ memberP(esk4_0,X12)
| ~ ssItem(X12) )
& ( memberP(esk4_0,esk5_1(X12))
| memberP(esk3_0,X12)
| ~ memberP(esk4_0,X12)
| ~ ssItem(X12) )
& ( leq(esk5_1(X12),X12)
| memberP(esk3_0,X12)
| ~ memberP(esk4_0,X12)
| ~ ssItem(X12) )
& ( X12 != esk5_1(X12)
| memberP(esk3_0,X12)
| ~ memberP(esk4_0,X12)
| ~ ssItem(X12) )
& ( memberP(esk4_0,X12)
| ~ memberP(esk3_0,X12)
| ~ ssItem(X12) )
& ( ~ ssItem(X14)
| X12 = X14
| ~ memberP(esk4_0,X14)
| ~ leq(X14,X12)
| ~ memberP(esk3_0,X12)
| ~ ssItem(X12) )
& ssItem(esk6_0)
& memberP(esk1_0,esk6_0)
& ~ memberP(esk2_0,esk6_0) ),
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)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[c_0_1])])])])])])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
( memberP(esk4_0,X1)
| ~ ssItem(X1)
| ~ memberP(esk3_0,X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
esk2_0 = esk4_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,negated_conjecture,
esk1_0 = esk3_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ memberP(esk2_0,esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
( memberP(esk2_0,X1)
| ~ memberP(esk1_0,X1)
| ~ ssItem(X1) ),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_3,c_0_4]),c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
memberP(esk1_0,esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
ssItem(esk6_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_2]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]),c_0_8]),c_0_9])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.13/0.13 % Problem : SWC406+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.13/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Jun 12 20:11:06 EDT 2022
% 0.20/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.25/1.43 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.43 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.25/1.43 # Preprocessing time : 0.022 s
% 0.25/1.43
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof found!
% 0.25/1.43 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/1.43 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object total steps : 11
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object clause steps : 8
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object formula steps : 3
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object conjectures : 11
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object clause conjectures : 8
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object initial formulas used : 1
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 0.25/1.43 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 5
% 0.25/1.43 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.43 # Parsed axioms : 96
% 0.25/1.43 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 66
% 0.25/1.43 # Initial clauses : 60
% 0.25/1.43 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Initial clauses in saturation : 60
% 0.25/1.43 # Processed clauses : 14
% 0.25/1.43 # ...of these trivial : 2
% 0.25/1.43 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # ...remaining for further processing : 12
% 0.25/1.43 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Generated clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.43 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Paramodulations : 1
% 0.25/1.43 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Current number of processed clauses : 12
% 0.25/1.43 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 9
% 0.25/1.43 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Negative unit clauses : 2
% 0.25/1.43 # Non-unit-clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.43 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 46
% 0.25/1.43 # ...number of literals in the above : 194
% 0.25/1.43 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # BW rewrite match attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # BW rewrite match successes : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/1.43 # Termbank termtop insertions : 5089
% 0.25/1.43
% 0.25/1.43 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.43 # User time : 0.018 s
% 0.25/1.43 # System time : 0.005 s
% 0.25/1.43 # Total time : 0.023 s
% 0.25/1.43 # Maximum resident set size: 2940 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------