TSTP Solution File: REL008+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : REL008+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n017.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 : Mon Jul 18 19:18:59 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.25s 1.42s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.25s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 6
% Number of leaves : 5
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 22 ( 22 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 22 ( 21 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 1 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 3 ( 3 ~; 0 |; 0 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 0 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 5 ( 2 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 4 ( 2 avg)
% Number of predicates : 2 ( 0 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 6 ( 6 usr; 3 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 43 ( 0 sgn 22 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(converse_additivity,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : converse(join(X1,X2)) = join(converse(X1),converse(X2)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/REL001+0.ax',converse_additivity) ).
fof(converse_idempotence,axiom,
! [X1] : converse(converse(X1)) = X1,
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/REL001+0.ax',converse_idempotence) ).
fof(composition_distributivity,axiom,
! [X1,X2,X3] : composition(join(X1,X2),X3) = join(composition(X1,X3),composition(X2,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/REL001+0.ax',composition_distributivity) ).
fof(converse_multiplicativity,axiom,
! [X1,X2] : converse(composition(X1,X2)) = composition(converse(X2),converse(X1)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/REL001+0.ax',converse_multiplicativity) ).
fof(goals,conjecture,
! [X1,X2,X3] : composition(X1,join(X2,X3)) = join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X1,X3)),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',goals) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X3,X4] : converse(join(X3,X4)) = join(converse(X3),converse(X4)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[converse_additivity]) ).
fof(c_0_6,plain,
! [X2] : converse(converse(X2)) = X2,
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[converse_idempotence]) ).
fof(c_0_7,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6] : composition(join(X4,X5),X6) = join(composition(X4,X6),composition(X5,X6)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[composition_distributivity]) ).
fof(c_0_8,plain,
! [X3,X4] : converse(composition(X3,X4)) = composition(converse(X4),converse(X3)),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[converse_multiplicativity]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
converse(join(X1,X2)) = join(converse(X1),converse(X2)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
converse(converse(X1)) = X1,
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,plain,
composition(join(X1,X2),X3) = join(composition(X1,X3),composition(X2,X3)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_7]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,plain,
converse(composition(X1,X2)) = composition(converse(X2),converse(X1)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).
fof(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1,X2,X3] : composition(X1,join(X2,X3)) = join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X1,X3)),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[goals]) ).
cnf(c_0_14,plain,
converse(join(converse(X1),X2)) = join(X1,converse(X2)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_15,plain,
join(converse(composition(X1,X2)),composition(X3,converse(X1))) = composition(join(converse(X2),X3),converse(X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12]) ).
cnf(c_0_16,plain,
converse(composition(X1,converse(X2))) = composition(X2,converse(X1)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_12,c_0_10]) ).
fof(c_0_17,negated_conjecture,
composition(esk1_0,join(esk2_0,esk3_0)) != join(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0),composition(esk1_0,esk3_0)),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_13])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_18,plain,
join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X1,converse(X3))) = composition(X1,join(X2,converse(X3))),
inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_14,c_0_15]),c_0_16]),c_0_14]),c_0_16]) ).
cnf(c_0_19,negated_conjecture,
composition(esk1_0,join(esk2_0,esk3_0)) != join(composition(esk1_0,esk2_0),composition(esk1_0,esk3_0)),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_17]) ).
cnf(c_0_20,plain,
join(composition(X1,X2),composition(X1,X3)) = composition(X1,join(X2,X3)),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_18,c_0_10]) ).
cnf(c_0_21,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_19,c_0_20])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.06/0.12 % Problem : REL008+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v4.0.0.
% 0.06/0.13 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.34 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.34 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.34 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.34 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.34 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.34 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.34 % DateTime : Fri Jul 8 11:29:46 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.25/1.42 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.42 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.25/1.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.014 s
% 0.25/1.42
% 0.25/1.42 # Failure: Out of unprocessed clauses!
% 0.25/1.42 # OLD status GaveUp
% 0.25/1.42 # Parsed axioms : 14
% 0.25/1.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 9
% 0.25/1.42 # Initial clauses : 5
% 0.25/1.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 5
% 0.25/1.42 # Processed clauses : 107
% 0.25/1.42 # ...of these trivial : 62
% 0.25/1.42 # ...subsumed : 37
% 0.25/1.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 8
% 0.25/1.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Backward-rewritten : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Generated clauses : 108
% 0.25/1.42 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 102
% 0.25/1.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Paramodulations : 108
% 0.25/1.42 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 8
% 0.25/1.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 3
% 0.25/1.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.25/1.42 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.25/1.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.25/1.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 6
% 0.25/1.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 16
% 0.25/1.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 16
% 0.25/1.42 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1117
% 0.25/1.42
% 0.25/1.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.42 # User time : 0.014 s
% 0.25/1.42 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.25/1.42 # Total time : 0.015 s
% 0.25/1.42 # Maximum resident set size: 2808 pages
% 0.25/1.42 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_f171197f65f27d1ba69648a20c844832c84a5dd7 for 23 seconds:
% 0.25/1.42 # Preprocessing time : 0.014 s
% 0.25/1.42
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof found!
% 0.25/1.42 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.25/1.42 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object total steps : 22
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object clause steps : 11
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object formula steps : 11
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object conjectures : 5
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object initial clauses used : 5
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object initial formulas used : 5
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object generating inferences : 5
% 0.25/1.42 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 5
% 0.25/1.42 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.25/1.42 # Parsed axioms : 14
% 0.25/1.42 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Initial clauses : 14
% 0.25/1.42 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 1
% 0.25/1.42 # Initial clauses in saturation : 13
% 0.25/1.42 # Processed clauses : 463
% 0.25/1.42 # ...of these trivial : 197
% 0.25/1.42 # ...subsumed : 72
% 0.25/1.42 # ...remaining for further processing : 194
% 0.25/1.42 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Backward-rewritten : 90
% 0.25/1.42 # Generated clauses : 4058
% 0.25/1.42 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 2629
% 0.25/1.42 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Paramodulations : 4058
% 0.25/1.42 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Current number of processed clauses : 104
% 0.25/1.42 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 100
% 0.25/1.42 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 4
% 0.25/1.42 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Non-unit-clauses : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1588
% 0.25/1.42 # ...number of literals in the above : 1588
% 0.25/1.42 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Current number of archived clauses : 91
% 0.25/1.42 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 13
% 0.25/1.42 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # BW rewrite match attempts : 476
% 0.25/1.42 # BW rewrite match successes : 105
% 0.25/1.42 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.25/1.42 # Termbank termtop insertions : 49198
% 0.25/1.42
% 0.25/1.42 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.25/1.42 # User time : 0.068 s
% 0.25/1.42 # System time : 0.006 s
% 0.25/1.42 # Total time : 0.074 s
% 0.25/1.42 # Maximum resident set size: 5192 pages
% 0.25/23.44 eprover: CPU time limit exceeded, terminating
% 0.25/23.45 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.45 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.46 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.46 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.46 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.46 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.47 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.47 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.47 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.47 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.48 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.48 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.48 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.48 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.49 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.49 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.49 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.49 eprover: No such file or directory
% 0.25/23.50 eprover: Cannot stat file /export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p
% 0.25/23.50 eprover: No such file or directory
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------