TSTP Solution File: GRP126-2.004 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : GRP126-2.004 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n013.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 : Sat Jul 16 11:41:38 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.91s 1.18s
% Output : Refutation 0.91s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.11/0.11 % Problem : GRP126-2.004 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.2.0.
% 0.11/0.12 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n013.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 : Mon Jun 13 23:18:14 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.35 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.12/0.35 The process was started by sandbox2 on n013.cluster.edu,
% 0.12/0.35 Mon Jun 13 23:18:14 2022
% 0.12/0.35 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 10573.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.12/0.35 set(auto).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.12/0.35 clear(print_given).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 list(usable).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=1, symmetry=0, max_lits=6.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 This ia a non-Horn set with equality. The strategy will be
% 0.12/0.35 Knuth-Bendix, ordered hyper_res, ur_res, factoring, and
% 0.12/0.35 unit deletion, with positive clauses in sos and nonpositive
% 0.12/0.35 clauses in usable.
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(knuth_bendix).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(para_from).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(para_into).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(para_from_right).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: clear(para_into_right).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(para_from_vars).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(eq_units_both_ways).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(dynamic_demod_all).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(dynamic_demod).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(order_eq).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(back_demod).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(lrpo).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.12/0.35 dependent: set(factor).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ------------> process usable:
% 0.12/0.35 Following clause subsumed by 3 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_2,e_1).
% 0.12/0.35 Following clause subsumed by 5 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_3,e_1).
% 0.12/0.35 Following clause subsumed by 9 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_3,e_2).
% 0.12/0.35 Following clause subsumed by 7 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_4,e_1).
% 0.12/0.35 Following clause subsumed by 11 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_4,e_2).
% 0.12/0.35 Following clause subsumed by 13 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_4,e_3).
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ------------> process sos:
% 0.12/0.35
% 0.12/0.35 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.12/0.37 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.12/0.37 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.12/0.37 number of clauses in intial UL: 17
% 0.12/0.37 number of clauses initially in problem: 31
% 0.12/0.37 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 54
% 0.12/0.37 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 100
% 0.12/0.37 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.12/0.37 absolute distinct symbol count: 9
% 0.12/0.37 distinct predicate count: 5
% 0.12/0.37 distinct function count: 0
% 0.12/0.37 distinct constant count: 4
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37
% 0.12/0.37 =========== start of search ===========
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 -------- PROOF --------
% 0.91/1.18 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.91/1.18 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Model 3 [ 1 0 327 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Model 4 [ 3 0 248 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Model 5 [ 3 1 413 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Model 6 [ 4 0 186 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Model 7 [ 4 0 206 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Model 8 [ 4 0 711 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 0.81 sec ----> 400 [binary,398.1,9.1] {+} $F.
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Length of proof is 19. Level of proof is 10.
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 0.91/1.18 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.91/1.18 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 1 [] {+} -product(A,e_1,B)| -next(A,C)| -greater(B,C).
% 0.91/1.18 2 [] {-} -equalish(e_1,e_2).
% 0.91/1.18 3 [copy,2,flip.1] {+} -equalish(e_2,e_1).
% 0.91/1.18 4 [] {-} -equalish(e_1,e_3).
% 0.91/1.18 5 [copy,4,flip.1] {+} -equalish(e_3,e_1).
% 0.91/1.18 6 [] {-} -equalish(e_1,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 7 [copy,6,flip.1] {+} -equalish(e_4,e_1).
% 0.91/1.18 8 [] {-} -equalish(e_2,e_3).
% 0.91/1.18 9 [copy,8,flip.1] {+} -equalish(e_3,e_2).
% 0.91/1.18 14 [] {+} -group_element(A)| -group_element(B)|product(A,B,e_1)|product(A,B,e_2)|product(A,B,e_3)|product(A,B,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 15 [] {+} -product(A,B,C)| -product(A,B,D)|equalish(C,D).
% 0.91/1.18 16 [] {+} -product(A,B,C)| -product(A,D,C)|equalish(B,D).
% 0.91/1.18 17 [] {+} -product(A,B,C)| -product(D,B,C)|equalish(A,D).
% 0.91/1.18 18 [] {+} -product(A,B,C)| -product(B,A,D)|product(C,D,B).
% 0.91/1.18 25 [] {+} next(e_2,e_3).
% 0.91/1.18 32 [] {+} greater(e_4,e_3).
% 0.91/1.18 33 [] {+} group_element(e_1).
% 0.91/1.18 34 [] {+} group_element(e_2).
% 0.91/1.18 35 [] {-} group_element(e_3).
% 0.91/1.18 37 [] {-} product(A,A,A).
% 0.91/1.18 47 [hyper,34,14,33] {-} product(e_1,e_2,e_1)|product(e_1,e_2,e_2)|product(e_1,e_2,e_3)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 48 [hyper,34,14,33] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_1)|product(e_2,e_1,e_2)|product(e_2,e_1,e_3)|product(e_2,e_1,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 53 [hyper,35,14,33] {-} product(e_1,e_3,e_1)|product(e_1,e_3,e_2)|product(e_1,e_3,e_3)|product(e_1,e_3,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 105 [hyper,47,16,37,unit_del,3] {-} product(e_1,e_2,e_2)|product(e_1,e_2,e_3)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 107 [hyper,105,17,37,unit_del,3] {-} product(e_1,e_2,e_3)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 148 [hyper,48,17,37,unit_del,3] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_2)|product(e_2,e_1,e_3)|product(e_2,e_1,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 167 [hyper,148,16,37,unit_del,3] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_3)|product(e_2,e_1,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 211 [hyper,167,1,25,32] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_3).
% 0.91/1.18 213 [hyper,211,18,107] {-} product(e_3,e_3,e_2)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 248 [hyper,213,15,37,unit_del,9] {-} product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 277 [hyper,248,18,211] {-} product(e_4,e_3,e_2).
% 0.91/1.18 363 [hyper,53,16,37,unit_del,5] {-} product(e_1,e_3,e_2)|product(e_1,e_3,e_3)|product(e_1,e_3,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 372 [hyper,363,17,277,unit_del,7] {-} product(e_1,e_3,e_3)|product(e_1,e_3,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 390 [hyper,372,17,37,unit_del,5] {-} product(e_1,e_3,e_4).
% 0.91/1.18 398 [hyper,390,16,248,flip.1] {-} equalish(e_3,e_2).
% 0.91/1.18 400 [binary,398.1,9.1] {+} $F.
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.91/1.18 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 ============ end of search ============
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 true clauses given 9 (23.7%)
% 0.91/1.18 false clauses given 29
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 FALSE TRUE
% 0.91/1.18 4 1 0
% 0.91/1.18 10 0 12
% 0.91/1.18 11 0 53
% 0.91/1.18 12 0 42
% 0.91/1.18 15 0 65
% 0.91/1.18 16 6 18
% 0.91/1.18 19 0 21
% 0.91/1.18 tot: 7 211 (96.8% true)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Model 8 [ 4 -15 711 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 0.91/1.18
% 0.91/1.18 Process 10573 finished Mon Jun 13 23:18:14 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------