TSTP Solution File: KLE059+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : KLE059+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n006.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 : Sun Jul 17 01:55:39 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 9 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 12 ( 11 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 6 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 1 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 2 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 4 ( 4 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 10 ( 0 sgn 8 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(goals,conjecture,
! [X4,X5] :
( addition(X4,X5) = X5
=> addition(domain(X4),domain(X5)) = domain(X5) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',goals) ).
fof(domain5,axiom,
! [X4,X5] : domain(addition(X4,X5)) = addition(domain(X4),domain(X5)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/KLE001+5.ax',domain5) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X4,X5] :
( addition(X4,X5) = X5
=> addition(domain(X4),domain(X5)) = domain(X5) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals]) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X6,X7] : domain(addition(X6,X7)) = addition(domain(X6),domain(X7)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[domain5]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( addition(esk1_0,esk2_0) = esk2_0
& addition(domain(esk1_0),domain(esk2_0)) != domain(esk2_0) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
domain(addition(X1,X2)) = addition(domain(X1),domain(X2)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
addition(esk1_0,esk2_0) = esk2_0,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
addition(domain(esk1_0),domain(esk2_0)) != domain(esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(sr,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.12 % Problem : KLE059+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.10/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33 % Computer : n006.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 : Thu Jun 16 08:20:11 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.23/1.40 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.23/1.40 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.23/1.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.014 s
% 0.23/1.40
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof found!
% 0.23/1.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/1.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object total steps : 9
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object clause steps : 4
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object conjectures : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object clause conjectures : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object initial clauses used : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object initial formulas used : 2
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.23/1.40 # Parsed axioms : 18
% 0.23/1.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 8
% 0.23/1.40 # Initial clauses : 11
% 0.23/1.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 11
% 0.23/1.40 # Processed clauses : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Generated clauses : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Paramodulations : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 6
% 0.23/1.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 7
% 0.23/1.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 527
% 0.23/1.40
% 0.23/1.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/1.40 # User time : 0.012 s
% 0.23/1.40 # System time : 0.002 s
% 0.23/1.40 # Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.23/1.40 # Maximum resident set size: 2816 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------