TSTP Solution File: KLE064+1 by SRASS---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : KLE064+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art11.cs.miami.edu
% Model : i686 i686
% CPU : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 3.00GHz @ 3000MHz
% Memory : 2006MB
% OS : Linux 2.6.31.5-127.fc12.i686.PAE
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Wed Dec 29 07:56:51 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 1.19s
% Output : Solution 1.19s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 0
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ERROR: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% Reading problem from /tmp/SystemOnTPTP21266/KLE064+1.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ...
% found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP21266/KLE064+1.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP21266/KLE064+1.tptp
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% TreeLimitedRun: /home/graph/tptp/Systems/EP---1.2/eproof --print-statistics -xAuto -tAuto --cpu-limit=60 --proof-time-unlimited --memory-limit=Auto --tstp-in --tstp-out /tmp/SRASS.s.p
% TreeLimitedRun: CPU time limit is 60s
% TreeLimitedRun: WC time limit is 120s
% TreeLimitedRun: PID is 21398
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.02 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.010 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(1, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:addition(X1,X2)=addition(X2,X1),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', additive_commutativity)).
% fof(2, axiom,![X3]:![X2]:![X1]:addition(X1,addition(X2,X3))=addition(addition(X1,X2),X3),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', additive_associativity)).
% fof(3, axiom,![X1]:addition(X1,X1)=X1,file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', additive_idempotence)).
% fof(6, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:multiplication(addition(X1,X2),X3)=addition(multiplication(X1,X3),multiplication(X2,X3)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', left_distributivity)).
% fof(7, axiom,![X4]:addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X4),X4))=multiplication(domain(X4),X4),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', domain1)).
% fof(9, axiom,![X4]:![X5]:domain(addition(X4,X5))=addition(domain(X4),domain(X5)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', domain5)).
% fof(17, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(leq(X1,X2)<=>addition(X1,X2)=X2),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', order)).
% fof(18, conjecture,![X4]:![X5]:(addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X5),X4))=multiplication(domain(X5),X4)<=addition(domain(X4),domain(X5))=domain(X5)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', goals)).
% fof(19, negated_conjecture,~(![X4]:![X5]:(addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X5),X4))=multiplication(domain(X5),X4)<=addition(domain(X4),domain(X5))=domain(X5))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[18])).
% fof(20, negated_conjecture,~(![X4]:![X5]:(addition(domain(X4),domain(X5))=domain(X5)=>addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X5),X4))=multiplication(domain(X5),X4))),inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[19,theory(equality)])).
% fof(21, plain,![X3]:![X4]:addition(X3,X4)=addition(X4,X3),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[1])).
% cnf(22,plain,(addition(X1,X2)=addition(X2,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[21])).
% fof(23, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:addition(X6,addition(X5,X4))=addition(addition(X6,X5),X4),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[2])).
% cnf(24,plain,(addition(X1,addition(X2,X3))=addition(addition(X1,X2),X3)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[23])).
% fof(25, plain,![X2]:addition(X2,X2)=X2,inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[3])).
% cnf(26,plain,(addition(X1,X1)=X1),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[25])).
% fof(31, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:multiplication(addition(X4,X5),X6)=addition(multiplication(X4,X6),multiplication(X5,X6)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[6])).
% cnf(32,plain,(multiplication(addition(X1,X2),X3)=addition(multiplication(X1,X3),multiplication(X2,X3))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[31])).
% fof(33, plain,![X5]:addition(X5,multiplication(domain(X5),X5))=multiplication(domain(X5),X5),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[7])).
% cnf(34,plain,(addition(X1,multiplication(domain(X1),X1))=multiplication(domain(X1),X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[33])).
% fof(37, plain,![X6]:![X7]:domain(addition(X6,X7))=addition(domain(X6),domain(X7)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[9])).
% cnf(38,plain,(domain(addition(X1,X2))=addition(domain(X1),domain(X2))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[37])).
% fof(52, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((~(leq(X1,X2))|addition(X1,X2)=X2)&(~(addition(X1,X2)=X2)|leq(X1,X2))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[17])).
% fof(53, plain,![X3]:![X4]:((~(leq(X3,X4))|addition(X3,X4)=X4)&(~(addition(X3,X4)=X4)|leq(X3,X4))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[52])).
% cnf(54,plain,(leq(X1,X2)|addition(X1,X2)!=X2),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[53])).
% cnf(55,plain,(addition(X1,X2)=X2|~leq(X1,X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[53])).
% fof(56, negated_conjecture,?[X4]:?[X5]:(addition(domain(X4),domain(X5))=domain(X5)&~(addition(X4,multiplication(domain(X5),X4))=multiplication(domain(X5),X4))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[20])).
% fof(57, negated_conjecture,?[X6]:?[X7]:(addition(domain(X6),domain(X7))=domain(X7)&~(addition(X6,multiplication(domain(X7),X6))=multiplication(domain(X7),X6))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[56])).
% fof(58, negated_conjecture,(addition(domain(esk1_0),domain(esk2_0))=domain(esk2_0)&~(addition(esk1_0,multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0))=multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[57])).
% cnf(59,negated_conjecture,(addition(esk1_0,multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0))!=multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[58])).
% cnf(60,negated_conjecture,(addition(domain(esk1_0),domain(esk2_0))=domain(esk2_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[58])).
% cnf(77,plain,(addition(X1,addition(X2,X3))=addition(X3,addition(X1,X2))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[22,24,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(83,plain,(addition(X1,X2)=addition(X1,addition(X1,X2))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[24,26,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(115,negated_conjecture,(domain(addition(esk1_0,esk2_0))=domain(esk2_0)),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[60,38,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(448,plain,(leq(X1,addition(X1,X2))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[54,83,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(993,plain,(leq(X1,addition(X3,addition(X1,X2)))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[448,77,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(1783,plain,(leq(X1,addition(X2,multiplication(domain(X1),X1)))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[993,34,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(2705,plain,(leq(X1,multiplication(addition(X2,domain(X1)),X1))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[1783,32,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(3845,plain,(leq(X1,multiplication(domain(addition(X2,X1)),X1))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[2705,38,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4485,plain,(leq(X1,multiplication(domain(addition(X1,X2)),X1))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[3845,22,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4608,negated_conjecture,(leq(esk1_0,multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[4485,115,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4646,negated_conjecture,(addition(esk1_0,multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0))=multiplication(domain(esk2_0),esk1_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[55,4608,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4647,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(sr,[status(thm)],[4646,59,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(4648,negated_conjecture,($false),4647,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 307
% # ...of these trivial : 68
% # ...subsumed : 133
% # ...remaining for further processing: 106
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 7
% # Generated clauses : 2585
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 1465
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% # Paramodulations : 2584
% # Factorizations : 0
% # Equation resolutions : 1
% # Current number of processed clauses: 99
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 79
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 3
% # Negative unit clauses : 1
% # Non-unit-clauses : 16
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1115
% # ...number of literals in the above : 1371
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 463
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 463
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 9
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 98
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 55
% # Backwards rewriting index: 124 leaves, 1.42+/-0.993 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 63 leaves, 1.33+/-0.735 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 109 leaves, 1.42+/-1.016 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.055 s
% # System time : 0.004 s
% # Total time : 0.059 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.19 CPU 0.26 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.19 CPU 0.26 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP21266/KLE064+1.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------