TSTP Solution File: MGT034-2 by SOS---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SOS---2.0
% Problem : MGT034-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : sos-script %s
% Computer : n028.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 22:25:55 EDT 2022
% Result : Unsatisfiable 51.05s 51.29s
% Output : Refutation 51.05s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : -
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12 % Problem : MGT034-2 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.4.0.
% 0.07/0.13 % Command : sos-script %s
% 0.12/0.34 % Computer : n028.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.12/0.34 % DateTime : Thu Jun 9 08:50:02 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.34 % CPUTime :
% 0.12/0.36 ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.12/0.36 The process was started by sandbox2 on n028.cluster.edu,
% 0.12/0.36 Thu Jun 9 08:50:02 2022
% 0.12/0.36 The command was "./sos". The process ID is 4845.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.12/0.36 set(auto).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.12/0.36 clear(print_given).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 list(usable).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=1, symmetry=0, max_lits=7.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 This ia a non-Horn set with equality. The strategy will be
% 0.12/0.36 Knuth-Bendix, ordered hyper_res, ur_res, factoring, and
% 0.12/0.36 unit deletion, with positive clauses in sos and nonpositive
% 0.12/0.36 clauses in usable.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(knuth_bendix).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_from).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_into).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(para_from_right).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: clear(para_into_right).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(para_from_vars).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(eq_units_both_ways).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(dynamic_demod_all).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(dynamic_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(order_eq).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(back_demod).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(lrpo).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.12/0.36 dependent: set(factor).
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ------------> process usable:
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ------------> process sos:
% 0.12/0.36 Following clause subsumed by 33 during input processing: 0 [copy,33,flip.1] {-} A=A.
% 0.12/0.36
% 0.12/0.36 ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53 Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53 -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53 UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.19/0.53 SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.19/0.53 SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.19/0.53 number of clauses in intial UL: 28
% 0.19/0.53 number of clauses initially in problem: 33
% 0.19/0.53 percentage of clauses intially in UL: 84
% 0.19/0.53 percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 95
% 0.19/0.53 percent of all initial clauses that are short: 96
% 0.19/0.53 absolute distinct symbol count: 21
% 0.19/0.53 distinct predicate count: 8
% 0.19/0.53 distinct function count: 8
% 0.19/0.53 distinct constant count: 5
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53 ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.19/0.53
% 0.19/0.53 =========== start of search ===========
% 42.03/42.24
% 42.03/42.24
% 42.03/42.24 Changing weight limit from 60 to 36.
% 42.03/42.24
% 42.03/42.24 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 42.03/42.24
% 42.03/42.24 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 42.03/42.24
% 42.03/42.24 Stopped by limit on insertions
% 42.03/42.24
% 42.03/42.24 Modelling stopped after 300 given clauses and 0.00 seconds
% 42.03/42.24
% 42.03/42.24
% 42.03/42.24 Resetting weight limit to 36 after 510 givens.
% 42.03/42.24
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 -- HEY sandbox2, WE HAVE A PROOF!! --
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 -----> EMPTY CLAUSE at 50.89 sec ----> 9413 [hyper,9392,22,29,33] {-} $F.
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 Length of proof is 18. Level of proof is 14.
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 51.05/51.29 % SZS status Unsatisfiable
% 51.05/51.29 % SZS output start Refutation
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 1 [] {+} -environment(A)| -subpopulations(B,C,A,D)| -greater(growth_rate(C,D),growth_rate(B,D))|selection_favors(C,B,D).
% 51.05/51.29 2 [] {+} -environment(A)| -subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,B)| -decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,B),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,B))).
% 51.05/51.29 3 [] {+} -environment(A)| -in_environment(A,critical_point(A))|subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,critical_point(A)).
% 51.05/51.29 4 [] {+} -environment(A)| -in_environment(A,appear(efficient_producers,A))|subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,appear(efficient_producers,A)).
% 51.05/51.29 5 [] {+} -decreases(difference(founding_rate(first_movers,A),founding_rate(efficient_producers,A)))|decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,A),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,A)))|decreases(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,A),growth_rate(efficient_producers,A))).
% 51.05/51.29 6 [] {+} -environment(A)| -in_environment(A,B)| -greater_or_equal(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,B),growth_rate(efficient_producers,B)),zero)| -greater_or_equal(C,appear(efficient_producers,A))| -greater(B,C)| -decreases(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,C),growth_rate(efficient_producers,C)))|greater(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,C),growth_rate(efficient_producers,C)),zero).
% 51.05/51.29 7 [] {+} -greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,A),growth_rate(efficient_producers,A)))|greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,A),growth_rate(first_movers,A)).
% 51.05/51.29 9 [] {+} -greater(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,A),growth_rate(efficient_producers,A)),zero)|greater(growth_rate(first_movers,A),growth_rate(efficient_producers,A)).
% 51.05/51.29 14 [] {+} -environment(A)| -in_environment(A,critical_point(A))| -greater_or_equal(B,appear(efficient_producers,A))| -greater(critical_point(A),B)|in_environment(A,B).
% 51.05/51.29 16 [] {+} -environment(A)| -subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,B)|subpopulations(efficient_producers,first_movers,A,B).
% 51.05/51.29 17 [] {+} -environment(A)| -subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,B)|greater_or_equal(B,appear(efficient_producers,A)).
% 51.05/51.29 18 [] {+} -greater_or_equal(A,B)|greater(A,B)|A=B.
% 51.05/51.29 19 [] {+} -greater(A,B)|greater_or_equal(A,B).
% 51.05/51.29 20 [] {+} A!=B|greater_or_equal(A,B).
% 51.05/51.29 21 [] {+} -environment(A)| -subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,B)|greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,B),growth_rate(efficient_producers,B)))|greater_or_equal(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,B),growth_rate(efficient_producers,B)),zero).
% 51.05/51.29 22 [] {+} -environment(A)|B!=critical_point(A)| -greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,B),growth_rate(first_movers,B)).
% 51.05/51.29 24 [] {+} -environment(A)| -subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,B)| -subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,C)| -greater_or_equal(D,B)| -greater_or_equal(C,D)|subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,D).
% 51.05/51.29 25 [] {+} -environment(A)| -subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,A,B)|decreases(difference(founding_rate(first_movers,B),founding_rate(efficient_producers,B))).
% 51.05/51.29 26 [] {+} -selection_favors(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk2).
% 51.05/51.29 29 [] {-} environment(sk1).
% 51.05/51.29 30 [] {+} in_environment(sk1,critical_point(sk1)).
% 51.05/51.29 31 [] {+} greater_or_equal(sk2,appear(efficient_producers,sk1)).
% 51.05/51.29 32 [] {+} greater(critical_point(sk1),sk2).
% 51.05/51.29 33 [] {+} A=A.
% 51.05/51.29 47 [hyper,33,20] {+} greater_or_equal(A,A).
% 51.05/51.29 48 [hyper,30,3,29] {+} subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,critical_point(sk1)).
% 51.05/51.29 69 [hyper,32,19] {+} greater_or_equal(critical_point(sk1),sk2).
% 51.05/51.29 148 [hyper,48,21,29] {-} greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,critical_point(sk1)),growth_rate(efficient_producers,critical_point(sk1))))|greater_or_equal(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,critical_point(sk1)),growth_rate(efficient_producers,critical_point(sk1))),zero).
% 51.05/51.29 149 [hyper,48,17,29] {+} greater_or_equal(critical_point(sk1),appear(efficient_producers,sk1)).
% 51.05/51.29 172 [hyper,149,18] {+} greater(critical_point(sk1),appear(efficient_producers,sk1))|critical_point(sk1)=appear(efficient_producers,sk1).
% 51.05/51.29 992 [hyper,172,14,29,30,47] {-} critical_point(sk1)=appear(efficient_producers,sk1)|in_environment(sk1,appear(efficient_producers,sk1)).
% 51.05/51.29 1047 [para_from,992.1.1,30.1.2,factor_simp] {-} in_environment(sk1,appear(efficient_producers,sk1)).
% 51.05/51.29 1048 [hyper,1047,4,29] {+} subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,appear(efficient_producers,sk1)).
% 51.05/51.29 1066 [hyper,1048,24,29,48,31,69] {+} subpopulations(first_movers,efficient_producers,sk1,sk2).
% 51.05/51.29 1123 [hyper,1066,25,29] {+} decreases(difference(founding_rate(first_movers,sk2),founding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))).
% 51.05/51.29 1125 [hyper,1066,16,29] {+} subpopulations(efficient_producers,first_movers,sk1,sk2).
% 51.05/51.29 1248 [hyper,1123,5] {+} decreases(difference(disbanding_rate(first_movers,sk2),disbanding_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)))|decreases(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,sk2),growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))).
% 51.05/51.29 9277 [hyper,1248,2,29,1066] {+} decreases(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,sk2),growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk2))).
% 51.05/51.29 9320 [hyper,9277,6,29,30,148,31,32] {-} greater(difference(growth_rate(first_movers,sk2),growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)),zero)|greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,critical_point(sk1)),growth_rate(efficient_producers,critical_point(sk1)))).
% 51.05/51.29 9356 [hyper,9320,9] {-} greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,critical_point(sk1)),growth_rate(efficient_producers,critical_point(sk1))))|greater(growth_rate(first_movers,sk2),growth_rate(efficient_producers,sk2)).
% 51.05/51.29 9390 [hyper,9356,1,29,1125,unit_del,26] {-} greater(zero,difference(growth_rate(first_movers,critical_point(sk1)),growth_rate(efficient_producers,critical_point(sk1)))).
% 51.05/51.29 9392 [hyper,9390,7] {-} greater(growth_rate(efficient_producers,critical_point(sk1)),growth_rate(first_movers,critical_point(sk1))).
% 51.05/51.29 9413 [hyper,9392,22,29,33] {-} $F.
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 % SZS output end Refutation
% 51.05/51.29 ------------ end of proof -------------
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 ============ end of search ============
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 true clauses given 241 (34.9%)
% 51.05/51.29 false clauses given 449
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 FALSE TRUE
% 51.05/51.29 11 1 0
% 51.05/51.29 14 0 4
% 51.05/51.29 16 0 53
% 51.05/51.29 17 3 96
% 51.05/51.29 18 0 128
% 51.05/51.29 19 0 162
% 51.05/51.29 20 1 134
% 51.05/51.29 21 0 242
% 51.05/51.29 22 0 214
% 51.05/51.29 23 0 253
% 51.05/51.29 24 0 122
% 51.05/51.29 25 1 182
% 51.05/51.29 26 15 209
% 51.05/51.29 27 1 278
% 51.05/51.29 28 400 244
% 51.05/51.29 29 385 179
% 51.05/51.29 30 11 0
% 51.05/51.29 32 365 0
% 51.05/51.29 34 41 0
% 51.05/51.29 36 8 0
% 51.05/51.29 tot: 1232 2500 (67.0% true)
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 51.05/51.29
% 51.05/51.29 Process 4845 finished Thu Jun 9 08:50:53 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------