TSTP Solution File: LCL103-1 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : LCL103-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n008.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 14:27:56 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 12.07s 12.28s
% Output : Refutation 12.07s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.04/0.13 % Problem : LCL103-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v1.0.0.
% 0.04/0.14 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.14/0.36 % Computer : n008.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.36 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.36 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.36 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.36 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.36 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.14/0.36 % DateTime : Sun Jul 3 10:11:53 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.36 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.38 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.14/0.38 The process was started by sandbox2 on n008.cluster.edu,
% 0.14/0.38 Sun Jul 3 10:11:53 2022
% 0.14/0.38 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 17705.
% 0.14/0.38
% 0.14/0.38 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.14/0.38 set(auto).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.14/0.38 clear(print_given).
% 0.14/0.38
% 0.14/0.38 list(usable).
% 0.14/0.38
% 0.14/0.38 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=1, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=3.
% 0.14/0.38
% 0.14/0.38 This is a Horn set without equality. The strategy will
% 0.14/0.38 be hyperresolution, with satellites in sos and nuclei
% 0.14/0.38 in usable.
% 0.14/0.38
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.14/0.38 dependent: clear(order_hyper).
% 0.14/0.38
% 0.14/0.38 ------------> process usable:
% 0.14/0.38
% 0.14/0.38 ------------> process sos:
% 0.14/0.38
% 0.14/0.38 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.21/0.40 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.21/0.40 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.21/0.40 number of clauses in intial UL: 2
% 0.21/0.40 number of clauses initially in problem: 4
% 0.21/0.40 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 50
% 0.21/0.40 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 100
% 0.21/0.40 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.21/0.40 absolute distinct symbol count: 6
% 0.21/0.40 distinct predicate count: 1
% 0.21/0.40 distinct function count: 1
% 0.21/0.40 distinct constant count: 4
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40
% 0.21/0.40 =========== start of search ===========
% 1.29/1.48
% 1.29/1.48
% 1.29/1.48 Changing weight limit from 60 to 44.
% 1.29/1.48
% 1.29/1.48 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 1.29/1.48
% 1.29/1.48 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 1.29/1.48
% 1.29/1.48 Model 3 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 1.29/1.48
% 1.29/1.48 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 1.29/1.48
% 1.29/1.48 Resetting weight limit to 44 after 90 givens.
% 1.29/1.48
% 7.85/8.05
% 7.85/8.05
% 7.85/8.05 Changing weight limit from 44 to 36.
% 7.85/8.05
% 7.85/8.05 Resetting weight limit to 36 after 260 givens.
% 7.85/8.05
% 8.16/8.35
% 8.16/8.35
% 8.16/8.35 Changing weight limit from 36 to 32.
% 8.16/8.35
% 8.16/8.35 Resetting weight limit to 32 after 265 givens.
% 8.16/8.35
% 8.39/8.61
% 8.39/8.61
% 8.39/8.61 Changing weight limit from 32 to 28.
% 8.39/8.61
% 8.39/8.61 Resetting weight limit to 28 after 270 givens.
% 8.39/8.61
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 -- HEY sandbox2, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 11.82 sec ----> 50824 [binary,50823.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 Length of proof is 16. Level of proof is 12.
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 12.07/12.28 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 12.07/12.28 % SZS output start Refutation
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 1 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,B))| -is_a_theorem(A)|is_a_theorem(B).
% 12.07/12.28 2 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(a,b),equivalent(a,c)),equivalent(b,c)),e),e)).
% 12.07/12.28 3 [] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),C),equivalent(equivalent(D,B),equivalent(equivalent(A,D),C)))).
% 12.07/12.28 4 [] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(B,A),C)),C)).
% 12.07/12.28 6 [hyper,4,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),D)),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(C,B),A),D))).
% 12.07/12.28 7 [hyper,6,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,C)),equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(C,B),D))),D)).
% 12.07/12.28 12 [hyper,7,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,equivalent(equivalent(C,D),E))),equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,equivalent(D,C)),A),E))).
% 12.07/12.28 13 [hyper,7,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,A)).
% 12.07/12.28 14 [hyper,13,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(equivalent(C,A),equivalent(C,B)))).
% 12.07/12.28 22 [hyper,14,1,14] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,C)),equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(D,B),equivalent(D,C))))).
% 12.07/12.28 23 [hyper,14,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(A,C)),equivalent(B,C))).
% 12.07/12.28 27 [hyper,14,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(B,equivalent(equivalent(C,D),E))),equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(D,C),B),E)))).
% 12.07/12.28 30 [hyper,14,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),D)),equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(E,C),equivalent(equivalent(B,E),D))))).
% 12.07/12.28 36 [hyper,23,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,B),A))).
% 12.07/12.28 74 [hyper,22,1,36] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,equivalent(C,C)),equivalent(B,A)))).
% 12.07/12.28 98 [hyper,74,1,6] {+} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,A),B),C),equivalent(B,C))).
% 12.07/12.28 1106 [hyper,98,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(equivalent(C,B),A)))).
% 12.07/12.28 2935 [hyper,30,1,1106] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(equivalent(D,B),equivalent(equivalent(C,D),A))))).
% 12.07/12.28 26724 [hyper,2935,1,27] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(A,equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(B,C),equivalent(B,D)),equivalent(equivalent(D,C),A)))).
% 12.07/12.28 50823 [hyper,26724,1,12] {-} is_a_theorem(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(equivalent(A,B),equivalent(A,C)),equivalent(B,C)),D),D)).
% 12.07/12.28 50824 [binary,50823.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 % SZS output end Refutation
% 12.07/12.28 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 ============ end of search ============
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 true clauses given 25 (6.8%)
% 12.07/12.28 false clauses given 342
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 FALSE TRUE
% 12.07/12.28 16 12 151
% 12.07/12.28 20 2526 645
% 12.07/12.28 24 140 1345
% 12.07/12.28 28 446 371
% 12.07/12.28 tot: 3124 2512 (44.6% true)
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 Model 3 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 12.07/12.28
% 12.07/12.28 Process 17705 finished Sun Jul 3 10:12:05 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------