TSTP Solution File: GRP127-1.004 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : GRP127-1.004 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n026.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 11:41:40 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 0.69s 0.89s
% Output : Refutation 0.69s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.12 % Problem : GRP127-1.004 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.2.0.
% 0.04/0.13 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n026.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 : Mon Jun 13 05:06:35 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.13/0.35 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.13/0.35 The process was started by sandbox2 on n026.cluster.edu,
% 0.13/0.35 Mon Jun 13 05:06:35 2022
% 0.13/0.35 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 25231.
% 0.13/0.35
% 0.13/0.35 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.13/0.35 set(auto).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.13/0.35 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.13/0.36 clear(print_given).
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 list(usable).
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=1, symmetry=0, max_lits=6.
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 This ia a non-Horn set with equality. The strategy will be
% 0.13/0.36 Knuth-Bendix, ordered hyper_res, ur_res, factoring, and
% 0.13/0.36 unit deletion, with positive clauses in sos and nonpositive
% 0.13/0.36 clauses in usable.
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(knuth_bendix).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(para_from).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(para_into).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: clear(para_from_right).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: clear(para_into_right).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(para_from_vars).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(eq_units_both_ways).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(dynamic_demod_all).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(dynamic_demod).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(order_eq).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(back_demod).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(lrpo).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.13/0.36 dependent: set(factor).
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 ------------> process usable:
% 0.13/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 2 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_2,e_1).
% 0.13/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 4 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_3,e_1).
% 0.13/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 8 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_3,e_2).
% 0.13/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 6 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_4,e_1).
% 0.13/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 10 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_4,e_2).
% 0.13/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 12 during input processing: 0 [] {-} -equalish(e_4,e_3).
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 ------------> process sos:
% 0.13/0.36
% 0.13/0.36 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.19/0.40 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.19/0.40 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.19/0.40 number of clauses in intial UL: 15
% 0.19/0.40 number of clauses initially in problem: 20
% 0.19/0.40 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 75
% 0.19/0.40 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 100
% 0.19/0.40 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.19/0.40 absolute distinct symbol count: 7
% 0.19/0.40 distinct predicate count: 3
% 0.19/0.40 distinct function count: 0
% 0.19/0.40 distinct constant count: 4
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.19/0.40
% 0.19/0.40 =========== start of search ===========
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 -------- PROOF --------
% 0.69/0.89 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.69/0.89 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Model 3 [ 1 1 258 ] (0.00 seconds, 35776 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Model 4 [ 2 0 292 ] (0.00 seconds, 33402 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Model 5 [ 3 0 110 ] (0.00 seconds, 60339 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Model 6 [ 10 1 199 ] (0.00 seconds, 1671 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 0.52 sec ----> 545 [binary,543.1,8.1] {-} $F.
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Length of proof is 27. Level of proof is 12.
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 0.69/0.89 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 0.69/0.89 % SZS output start Refutation
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 1 [] {-} -equalish(e_1,e_2).
% 0.69/0.89 2 [copy,1,flip.1] {+} -equalish(e_2,e_1).
% 0.69/0.89 3 [] {-} -equalish(e_1,e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 4 [copy,3,flip.1] {+} -equalish(e_3,e_1).
% 0.69/0.89 7 [] {-} -equalish(e_2,e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 8 [copy,7,flip.1] {+} -equalish(e_3,e_2).
% 0.69/0.89 13 [] {+} -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).
% 0.69/0.89 15 [] {+} -product(A,B,C)| -product(A,D,C)|equalish(B,D).
% 0.69/0.89 16 [] {+} -product(A,B,C)| -product(D,B,C)|equalish(A,D).
% 0.69/0.89 17 [] {+} -product(A,B,C)| -product(C,A,D)|product(D,A,B).
% 0.69/0.89 22 [] {+} group_element(e_1).
% 0.69/0.89 23 [] {+} group_element(e_2).
% 0.69/0.89 24 [] {+} group_element(e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 26 [] {-} product(A,A,A).
% 0.69/0.89 30 [hyper,23,13,22] {-} 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).
% 0.69/0.89 31 [hyper,23,13,22] {-} 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).
% 0.69/0.89 35 [hyper,24,13,23] {-} product(e_2,e_3,e_1)|product(e_2,e_3,e_2)|product(e_2,e_3,e_3)|product(e_2,e_3,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 36 [hyper,24,13,22] {-} 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).
% 0.69/0.89 64 [hyper,30,15,26,unit_del,2] {-} product(e_1,e_2,e_2)|product(e_1,e_2,e_3)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 77 [hyper,64,16,26,unit_del,2] {-} product(e_1,e_2,e_3)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 126 [hyper,31,16,26,unit_del,2] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_2)|product(e_2,e_1,e_3)|product(e_2,e_1,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 130 [hyper,126,15,26,unit_del,2] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_3)|product(e_2,e_1,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 169 [hyper,35,15,26,unit_del,8] {-} product(e_2,e_3,e_1)|product(e_2,e_3,e_3)|product(e_2,e_3,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 174 [hyper,169,16,26,unit_del,8] {-} product(e_2,e_3,e_1)|product(e_2,e_3,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 177 [hyper,174,17,77] {-} product(e_2,e_3,e_4)|product(e_3,e_2,e_3)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 178 [hyper,174,15,130,unit_del,4] {-} product(e_2,e_3,e_1)|product(e_2,e_1,e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 267 [hyper,177,16,77,unit_del,4,factor_simp] {-} product(e_2,e_3,e_4)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 268 [hyper,267,15,130,unit_del,4] {-} product(e_1,e_2,e_4)|product(e_2,e_1,e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 292 [hyper,36,15,26,unit_del,4] {-} product(e_1,e_3,e_2)|product(e_1,e_3,e_3)|product(e_1,e_3,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 301 [hyper,268,17,178,factor_simp] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_3)|product(e_4,e_2,e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 339 [hyper,301,17,130,factor_simp] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_3)|product(e_3,e_2,e_1).
% 0.69/0.89 398 [hyper,292,16,26,unit_del,4] {-} product(e_1,e_3,e_2)|product(e_1,e_3,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 415 [hyper,398,16,267,unit_del,2] {-} product(e_1,e_3,e_2)|product(e_1,e_2,e_4).
% 0.69/0.89 466 [hyper,415,15,398,unit_del,8,factor_simp] {-} product(e_1,e_3,e_2).
% 0.69/0.89 479 [hyper,466,17,339] {-} product(e_2,e_3,e_2)|product(e_2,e_1,e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 530 [hyper,479,16,466,unit_del,2] {-} product(e_2,e_1,e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 532 [hyper,530,17,466] {+} product(e_3,e_1,e_3).
% 0.69/0.89 543 [hyper,532,16,530,flip.1] {-} equalish(e_3,e_2).
% 0.69/0.89 545 [binary,543.1,8.1] {-} $F.
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 % SZS output end Refutation
% 0.69/0.89 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 ============ end of search ============
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 true clauses given 7 (15.9%)
% 0.69/0.89 false clauses given 37
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 FALSE TRUE
% 0.69/0.89 8 1 0
% 0.69/0.89 10 2 3
% 0.69/0.89 12 21 24
% 0.69/0.89 14 4 52
% 0.69/0.89 16 17 9
% 0.69/0.89 18 3 18
% 0.69/0.89 20 1 0
% 0.69/0.89 tot: 49 106 (68.4% true)
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Model 6 [ 10 1 199 ] (0.00 seconds, 1671 Inserts)
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 0.69/0.89
% 0.69/0.89 Process 25231 finished Mon Jun 13 05:06:36 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------