TSTP Solution File: SET020+1 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SET020+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 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 : Tue Jul 19 00:47:52 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.26s 1.44s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.26s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 5
% Number of leaves : 2
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 14 ( 6 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 39 ( 20 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 6 ( 2 avg)
% Number of connectives : 38 ( 13 ~; 10 |; 12 &)
% ( 0 <=>; 3 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 8 ( 4 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 3 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 1 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 7 ( 7 usr; 4 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 14 ( 0 sgn 10 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets1,conjecture,
! [X3,X4,X1] :
( ( member(X3,universal_class)
& member(X4,universal_class)
& X1 = ordered_pair(X3,X4) )
=> ( first(X1) = X3
& second(X1) = X4 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets1) ).
fof(first_second,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( ( member(X1,universal_class)
& member(X2,universal_class) )
=> ( first(ordered_pair(X1,X2)) = X1
& second(ordered_pair(X1,X2)) = X2 ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox2/benchmark/Axioms/SET005+0.ax',first_second) ).
fof(c_0_2,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X3,X4,X1] :
( ( member(X3,universal_class)
& member(X4,universal_class)
& X1 = ordered_pair(X3,X4) )
=> ( first(X1) = X3
& second(X1) = X4 ) ),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[unique_1st_and_2nd_in_pair_of_sets1]) ).
fof(c_0_3,plain,
! [X3,X4] :
( ( first(ordered_pair(X3,X4)) = X3
| ~ member(X3,universal_class)
| ~ member(X4,universal_class) )
& ( second(ordered_pair(X3,X4)) = X4
| ~ member(X3,universal_class)
| ~ member(X4,universal_class) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[first_second])])]) ).
fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
( member(esk1_0,universal_class)
& member(esk2_0,universal_class)
& esk3_0 = ordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0)
& ( first(esk3_0) != esk1_0
| second(esk3_0) != esk2_0 ) ),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_2])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_5,plain,
( first(ordered_pair(X2,X1)) = X2
| ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| ~ member(X2,universal_class) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
esk3_0 = ordered_pair(esk1_0,esk2_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,negated_conjecture,
member(esk1_0,universal_class),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
member(esk2_0,universal_class),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,plain,
( second(ordered_pair(X2,X1)) = X1
| ~ member(X1,universal_class)
| ~ member(X2,universal_class) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,negated_conjecture,
( second(esk3_0) != esk2_0
| first(esk3_0) != esk1_0 ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
first(esk3_0) = esk1_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_5,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_12,negated_conjecture,
second(esk3_0) = esk2_0,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_6]),c_0_7]),c_0_8])]) ).
cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_10,c_0_11])]),c_0_12])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.13 % Problem : SET020+1 : TPTP v8.1.0. Bugfixed v5.4.0.
% 0.07/0.14 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.35 % Computer : n017.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.35 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.35 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.35 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.35 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.35 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.35 % DateTime : Mon Jul 11 00:45:48 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.35 % CPUTime :
% 0.26/1.44 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.26/1.44 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.26/1.44 # Preprocessing time : 0.015 s
% 0.26/1.44
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof found!
% 0.26/1.44 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.26/1.44 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object total steps : 14
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object clause steps : 9
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object formula steps : 5
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object conjectures : 10
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object clause conjectures : 7
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object initial clauses used : 6
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object initial formulas used : 2
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object generating inferences : 2
% 0.26/1.44 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 10
% 0.26/1.44 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.26/1.44 # Parsed axioms : 44
% 0.26/1.44 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 40
% 0.26/1.44 # Initial clauses : 10
% 0.26/1.44 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Initial clauses in saturation : 10
% 0.26/1.44 # Processed clauses : 13
% 0.26/1.44 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # ...remaining for further processing : 12
% 0.26/1.44 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.26/1.44 # Generated clauses : 8
% 0.26/1.44 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 7
% 0.26/1.44 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Paramodulations : 8
% 0.26/1.44 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Current number of processed clauses : 11
% 0.26/1.44 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 5
% 0.26/1.44 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Negative unit clauses : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Non-unit-clauses : 6
% 0.26/1.44 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 4
% 0.26/1.44 # ...number of literals in the above : 10
% 0.26/1.44 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.26/1.44 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 2
% 0.26/1.44 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 2
% 0.26/1.44 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # BW rewrite match attempts : 1
% 0.26/1.44 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.26/1.44 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.26/1.44 # Termbank termtop insertions : 1112
% 0.26/1.44
% 0.26/1.44 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.26/1.44 # User time : 0.015 s
% 0.26/1.44 # System time : 0.001 s
% 0.26/1.44 # Total time : 0.016 s
% 0.26/1.44 # Maximum resident set size: 2760 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------