TSTP Solution File: LCL389-1 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : LCL389-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.3.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n015.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 14:29:51 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 19.53s 19.76s
% Output : Refutation 19.53s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : LCL389-1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.3.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.14/0.34 % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.14/0.34 % DateTime : Sun Jul 3 22:28:45 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.14/0.36 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.14/0.36 The process was started by sandbox on n015.cluster.edu,
% 0.14/0.36 Sun Jul 3 22:28:45 2022
% 0.14/0.36 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 22405.
% 0.14/0.36
% 0.14/0.36 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.14/0.36 set(auto).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.14/0.36 clear(print_given).
% 0.14/0.36
% 0.14/0.36 list(usable).
% 0.14/0.36
% 0.14/0.36 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=1, equality=0, symmetry=0, max_lits=3.
% 0.14/0.36
% 0.14/0.36 This is a Horn set without equality. The strategy will
% 0.14/0.36 be hyperresolution, with satellites in sos and nuclei
% 0.14/0.36 in usable.
% 0.14/0.36
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.14/0.36 dependent: clear(order_hyper).
% 0.14/0.36
% 0.14/0.36 ------------> process usable:
% 0.14/0.36
% 0.14/0.36 ------------> process sos:
% 0.14/0.36
% 0.14/0.36 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.14/0.39 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.14/0.39 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.14/0.39 number of clauses in intial UL: 2
% 0.14/0.39 number of clauses initially in problem: 5
% 0.14/0.39 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 40
% 0.14/0.39 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 100
% 0.14/0.39 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 100
% 0.14/0.39 absolute distinct symbol count: 6
% 0.14/0.39 distinct predicate count: 1
% 0.14/0.39 distinct function count: 2
% 0.14/0.39 distinct constant count: 3
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39
% 0.14/0.39 =========== start of search ===========
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99 Changing weight limit from 60 to 52.
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99 Model 2 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99 Model 3 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99 Model 4 [ 1 0 63 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 3.81/3.99
% 3.81/3.99 Resetting weight limit to 52 after 150 givens.
% 3.81/3.99
% 12.04/12.25
% 12.04/12.25
% 12.04/12.25 Changing weight limit from 52 to 36.
% 12.04/12.25
% 12.04/12.25 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 12.04/12.25
% 12.04/12.25 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 12.04/12.25
% 12.04/12.25 Model 5 [ 1 1 699 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 12.04/12.25
% 12.04/12.25 Resetting weight limit to 36 after 305 givens.
% 12.04/12.25
% 12.26/12.47
% 12.26/12.47
% 12.26/12.47 Changing weight limit from 36 to 28.
% 12.26/12.47
% 12.26/12.47 Resetting weight limit to 28 after 310 givens.
% 12.26/12.47
% 12.39/12.61
% 12.39/12.61
% 12.39/12.61 Changing weight limit from 28 to 26.
% 12.39/12.61
% 12.39/12.61 Resetting weight limit to 26 after 320 givens.
% 12.39/12.61
% 12.48/12.68
% 12.48/12.68
% 12.48/12.68 Changing weight limit from 26 to 22.
% 12.48/12.68
% 12.48/12.68 Resetting weight limit to 22 after 325 givens.
% 12.48/12.68
% 16.15/16.35
% 16.15/16.35
% 16.15/16.35 Changing weight limit from 22 to 21.
% 16.15/16.35
% 16.15/16.35 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 16.15/16.35
% 16.15/16.35 Model 6 [ 1 1 1800 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 16.15/16.35
% 16.15/16.35 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 16.15/16.35
% 16.15/16.35
% 16.15/16.35 Resetting weight limit to 21 after 475 givens.
% 16.15/16.35
% 16.31/16.56
% 16.31/16.56
% 16.31/16.56 Changing weight limit from 21 to 20.
% 16.31/16.56
% 16.31/16.56 Resetting weight limit to 20 after 500 givens.
% 16.31/16.56
% 16.55/16.76
% 16.55/16.76
% 16.55/16.76 Changing weight limit from 20 to 19.
% 16.55/16.76
% 16.55/16.76 Resetting weight limit to 19 after 550 givens.
% 16.55/16.76
% 16.84/17.07
% 16.84/17.07
% 16.84/17.07 Changing weight limit from 19 to 18.
% 16.84/17.07
% 16.84/17.07 Resetting weight limit to 18 after 590 givens.
% 16.84/17.07
% 17.16/17.39
% 17.16/17.39
% 17.16/17.39 Changing weight limit from 18 to 17.
% 17.16/17.39
% 17.16/17.39 Resetting weight limit to 17 after 630 givens.
% 17.16/17.39
% 17.89/18.07
% 17.89/18.07
% 17.89/18.07 Changing weight limit from 17 to 16.
% 17.89/18.07
% 17.89/18.07 Resetting weight limit to 16 after 870 givens.
% 17.89/18.07
% 18.99/19.23
% 18.99/19.23
% 18.99/19.23 Changing weight limit from 16 to 15.
% 18.99/19.23
% 18.99/19.23 Resetting weight limit to 15 after 1190 givens.
% 18.99/19.23
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 -- HEY sandbox, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 ----> UNIT CONFLICT at 19.12 sec ----> 61178 [binary,61177.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 Length of proof is 41. Level of proof is 26.
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 19.53/19.76 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 19.53/19.76 % SZS output start Refutation
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 1 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(implies(A,B))| -is_a_theorem(A)|is_a_theorem(B).
% 19.53/19.76 2 [] {+} -is_a_theorem(implies(implies(x,implies(y,not(z))),implies(x,implies(z,not(y))))).
% 19.53/19.76 3 [] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,B),implies(implies(B,C),implies(A,C)))).
% 19.53/19.76 4 [] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(A),A),A)).
% 19.53/19.76 5 [] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(A,implies(not(A),B))).
% 19.53/19.76 6 [hyper,3,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(implies(A,B),implies(C,B)),D),implies(implies(C,A),D))).
% 19.53/19.76 7 [hyper,4,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,B),implies(implies(not(A),A),B))).
% 19.53/19.76 9 [hyper,5,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(not(A),B),C),implies(A,C))).
% 19.53/19.76 13 [hyper,9,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,B),C),implies(implies(implies(not(A),D),B),C))).
% 19.53/19.76 15 [hyper,9,1,4] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(A,A)).
% 19.53/19.76 18 [hyper,6,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,implies(B,C)),implies(implies(D,B),implies(A,implies(D,C))))).
% 19.53/19.76 21 [hyper,6,1,9] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,not(B)),implies(B,implies(A,C)))).
% 19.53/19.76 24 [hyper,21,1,9] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(A,implies(B,implies(not(A),C)))).
% 19.53/19.76 26 [hyper,21,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,implies(B,C)),D),implies(implies(B,not(A)),D))).
% 19.53/19.76 37 [hyper,7,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(implies(not(A),A),B),C),implies(implies(A,B),C))).
% 19.53/19.76 43 [hyper,7,1,6] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(implies(implies(implies(A,B),implies(C,B)),D)),implies(implies(implies(A,B),implies(C,B)),D)),implies(implies(C,A),D))).
% 19.53/19.76 46 [hyper,7,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(implies(A,B)),implies(A,B)),implies(implies(B,C),implies(A,C)))).
% 19.53/19.76 55 [hyper,24,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,implies(not(B),C)),D),implies(B,D))).
% 19.53/19.76 71 [hyper,55,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(A,implies(implies(implies(not(A),B),C),implies(D,C)))).
% 19.53/19.76 85 [hyper,71,1,15] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(not(implies(A,A)),B),C),implies(D,C))).
% 19.53/19.76 111 [hyper,85,1,4] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(A,implies(B,B))).
% 19.53/19.76 126 [hyper,13,1,5] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(not(A),B),C),implies(not(implies(A,C)),D))).
% 19.53/19.76 162 [hyper,111,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,A),B),implies(C,B))).
% 19.53/19.76 198 [hyper,162,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,B),C),implies(implies(implies(D,D),B),C))).
% 19.53/19.76 203 [hyper,162,1,7] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(A,implies(implies(not(B),B),B))).
% 19.53/19.76 437 [hyper,203,1,18] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,implies(not(B),B)),implies(C,implies(A,B)))).
% 19.53/19.76 3719 [hyper,437,1,26] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(A),not(B)),implies(C,implies(B,A)))).
% 19.53/19.76 3757 [hyper,3719,1,437] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(A,implies(implies(not(B),not(C)),implies(C,B)))).
% 19.53/19.76 3805 [hyper,3757,1,3757] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(A),not(B)),implies(B,A))).
% 19.53/19.76 3864 [hyper,3805,1,198] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,A),not(B)),implies(B,C))).
% 19.53/19.76 3868 [hyper,3805,1,126] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(not(implies(A,implies(B,A))),C)).
% 19.53/19.76 3898 [hyper,3868,1,46] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,B),C),implies(B,C))).
% 19.53/19.76 4908 [hyper,3898,1,3864] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(not(A),implies(A,B))).
% 19.53/19.76 4959 [hyper,4908,1,3] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,B),C),implies(not(A),C))).
% 19.53/19.76 28680 [hyper,4959,1,437] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(A,implies(implies(implies(B,C),B),B))).
% 19.53/19.76 28797 [hyper,28680,1,43] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,implies(A,B)),implies(A,B))).
% 19.53/19.76 29207 [hyper,28797,1,437] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,implies(not(B),B)),implies(A,B))).
% 19.53/19.76 30415 [hyper,29207,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(not(A),B),implies(implies(B,A),A))).
% 19.53/19.76 30941 [hyper,30415,1,3898] {+} is_a_theorem(implies(A,implies(implies(A,B),B))).
% 19.53/19.76 30978 [hyper,30415,1,28680] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(implies(implies(A,B),A),A),C),C)).
% 19.53/19.76 31875 [hyper,30941,1,18] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,implies(B,C)),implies(B,implies(A,C)))).
% 19.53/19.76 49366 [hyper,30978,1,6] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,implies(implies(B,C),B)),implies(A,B))).
% 19.53/19.76 51988 [hyper,31875,1,3] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,B),implies(implies(C,A),implies(C,B)))).
% 19.53/19.76 58283 [hyper,49366,1,26] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(implies(A,B),not(C)),implies(C,A))).
% 19.53/19.76 58353 [hyper,58283,1,37] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,not(B)),implies(B,not(A)))).
% 19.53/19.76 61177 [hyper,51988,1,58353] {-} is_a_theorem(implies(implies(A,implies(B,not(C))),implies(A,implies(C,not(B))))).
% 19.53/19.76 61178 [binary,61177.1,2.1] {-} $F.
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 % SZS output end Refutation
% 19.53/19.76 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 ============ end of search ============
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 true clauses given 328 (24.7%)
% 19.53/19.76 false clauses given 1002
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 FALSE TRUE
% 19.53/19.76 12 127 219
% 19.53/19.76 13 1144 474
% 19.53/19.76 14 1229 877
% 19.53/19.76 15 0 930
% 19.53/19.76 tot: 2500 2500 (50.0% true)
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 Model 6 [ 1 1 1800 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 19.53/19.76
% 19.53/19.76 Process 22405 finished Sun Jul 3 22:29:05 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------