TSTP Solution File: SET062+3 by ET---2.0
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : ET---2.0
% Problem : SET062+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp:raw
% Command : run_ET %s %d
% Computer : n025.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 00:48:31 EDT 2022
% Result : Theorem 0.23s 1.40s
% Output : CNFRefutation 0.23s
% Verified :
% SZS Type : Refutation
% Derivation depth : 4
% Number of leaves : 3
% Syntax : Number of formulae : 12 ( 9 unt; 0 def)
% Number of atoms : 21 ( 0 equ)
% Maximal formula atoms : 7 ( 1 avg)
% Number of connectives : 18 ( 9 ~; 5 |; 2 &)
% ( 1 <=>; 1 =>; 0 <=; 0 <~>)
% Maximal formula depth : 10 ( 3 avg)
% Maximal term depth : 2 ( 1 avg)
% Number of predicates : 3 ( 2 usr; 1 prp; 0-2 aty)
% Number of functors : 3 ( 3 usr; 2 con; 0-2 aty)
% Number of variables : 16 ( 4 sgn 12 !; 0 ?)
% Comments :
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(prove_empty_set_subset,conjecture,
! [X1] : subset(empty_set,X1),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',prove_empty_set_subset) ).
fof(empty_set_defn,axiom,
! [X1] : ~ member(X1,empty_set),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',empty_set_defn) ).
fof(subset_defn,axiom,
! [X1,X2] :
( subset(X1,X2)
<=> ! [X3] :
( member(X3,X1)
=> member(X3,X2) ) ),
file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',subset_defn) ).
fof(c_0_3,negated_conjecture,
~ ! [X1] : subset(empty_set,X1),
inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[prove_empty_set_subset]) ).
fof(c_0_4,plain,
! [X2] : ~ member(X2,empty_set),
inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[empty_set_defn])]) ).
fof(c_0_5,plain,
! [X4,X5,X6,X4,X5] :
( ( ~ subset(X4,X5)
| ~ member(X6,X4)
| member(X6,X5) )
& ( member(esk2_2(X4,X5),X4)
| subset(X4,X5) )
& ( ~ member(esk2_2(X4,X5),X5)
| subset(X4,X5) ) ),
inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[subset_defn])])])])])])]) ).
fof(c_0_6,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(empty_set,esk1_0),
inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_3])])]) ).
cnf(c_0_7,plain,
~ member(X1,empty_set),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_4]) ).
cnf(c_0_8,plain,
( subset(X1,X2)
| member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).
cnf(c_0_9,negated_conjecture,
~ subset(empty_set,esk1_0),
inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_6]) ).
cnf(c_0_10,plain,
subset(empty_set,X1),
inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_7,c_0_8]) ).
cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
$false,
inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10])]),
[proof] ).
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.03/0.12 % Problem : SET062+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.03/0.12 % Command : run_ET %s %d
% 0.13/0.33 % Computer : n025.cluster.edu
% 0.13/0.33 % Model : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPU : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.13/0.33 % Memory : 8042.1875MB
% 0.13/0.33 % OS : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.13/0.33 % CPULimit : 300
% 0.13/0.33 % WCLimit : 600
% 0.13/0.33 % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 12:25:01 EDT 2022
% 0.13/0.33 % CPUTime :
% 0.23/1.40 # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.23/1.40 # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.23/1.40 # Preprocessing time : 0.013 s
% 0.23/1.40
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof found!
% 0.23/1.40 # SZS status Theorem
% 0.23/1.40 # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object total steps : 12
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object clause steps : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object formula steps : 7
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object conjectures : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object clause conjectures : 2
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object formula conjectures : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object initial clauses used : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object initial formulas used : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object generating inferences : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Proof object simplifying inferences : 2
% 0.23/1.40 # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.23/1.40 # Parsed axioms : 5
% 0.23/1.40 # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Initial clauses : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # Removed in clause preprocessing : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Initial clauses in saturation : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # Processed clauses : 7
% 0.23/1.40 # ...of these trivial : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # ...subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # ...remaining for further processing : 7
% 0.23/1.40 # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Backward-subsumed : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Backward-rewritten : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Generated clauses : 4
% 0.23/1.40 # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Paramodulations : 4
% 0.23/1.40 # Factorizations : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Equation resolutions : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of processed clauses : 6
% 0.23/1.40 # Positive orientable unit clauses : 2
% 0.23/1.40 # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Negative unit clauses : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Non-unit-clauses : 3
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 0
% 0.23/1.40 # ...number of literals in the above : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of archived formulas : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Current number of archived clauses : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # BW rewrite match attempts : 2
% 0.23/1.40 # BW rewrite match successes : 1
% 0.23/1.40 # Condensation attempts : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Condensation successes : 0
% 0.23/1.40 # Termbank termtop insertions : 317
% 0.23/1.40
% 0.23/1.40 # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.23/1.40 # User time : 0.010 s
% 0.23/1.40 # System time : 0.004 s
% 0.23/1.40 # Total time : 0.014 s
% 0.23/1.40 # Maximum resident set size: 2768 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------