TSTP Solution File: SET366+4 by SRASS---0.1

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SRASS---0.1
% Problem  : SET366+4 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp
% Command  : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s

% Computer : art02.cs.miami.edu
% Model    : i686 i686
% CPU      : Intel(R) Pentium(R) 4 CPU 2.80GHz @ 2793MHz
% Memory   : 2018MB
% OS       : Linux 2.6.26.8-57.fc8
% CPULimit : 300s
% DateTime : Wed Dec 29 23:09:39 EST 2010

% Result   : Theorem 0.88s
% Output   : Solution 0.88s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : None (Parsing solution fails)
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    : 0

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ERROR: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% Reading problem from /tmp/SystemOnTPTP28693/SET366+4.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM       ... found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP28693/SET366+4.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP28693/SET366+4.tptp
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% TreeLimitedRun: /home/graph/tptp/Systems/EP---1.2/eproof --print-statistics -xAuto -tAuto --cpu-limit=60 --proof-time-unlimited --memory-limit=Auto --tstp-in --tstp-out /tmp/SRASS.s.p 
% TreeLimitedRun: CPU time limit is 60s
% TreeLimitedRun: WC  time limit is 120s
% TreeLimitedRun: PID is 28789
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.00 WC
% # Preprocessing time     : 0.014 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(1, axiom,![X1]:~(member(X1,empty_set)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', empty_set)).
% fof(2, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(member(X1,power_set(X2))<=>subset(X1,X2)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', power_set)).
% fof(3, axiom,![X2]:![X3]:(subset(X2,X3)<=>![X1]:(member(X1,X2)=>member(X1,X3))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', subset)).
% fof(12, conjecture,![X2]:member(empty_set,power_set(X2)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', thI47)).
% fof(13, negated_conjecture,~(![X2]:member(empty_set,power_set(X2))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[12])).
% fof(14, plain,![X1]:~(member(X1,empty_set)),inference(fof_simplification,[status(thm)],[1,theory(equality)])).
% fof(16, plain,![X2]:~(member(X2,empty_set)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[14])).
% cnf(17,plain,(~member(X1,empty_set)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[16])).
% fof(18, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((~(member(X1,power_set(X2)))|subset(X1,X2))&(~(subset(X1,X2))|member(X1,power_set(X2)))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[2])).
% fof(19, plain,![X3]:![X4]:((~(member(X3,power_set(X4)))|subset(X3,X4))&(~(subset(X3,X4))|member(X3,power_set(X4)))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[18])).
% cnf(20,plain,(member(X1,power_set(X2))|~subset(X1,X2)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[19])).
% fof(22, plain,![X2]:![X3]:((~(subset(X2,X3))|![X1]:(~(member(X1,X2))|member(X1,X3)))&(?[X1]:(member(X1,X2)&~(member(X1,X3)))|subset(X2,X3))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[3])).
% fof(23, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(subset(X4,X5))|![X6]:(~(member(X6,X4))|member(X6,X5)))&(?[X7]:(member(X7,X4)&~(member(X7,X5)))|subset(X4,X5))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[22])).
% fof(24, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(subset(X4,X5))|![X6]:(~(member(X6,X4))|member(X6,X5)))&((member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)&~(member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)))|subset(X4,X5))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[23])).
% fof(25, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:(((~(member(X6,X4))|member(X6,X5))|~(subset(X4,X5)))&((member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)&~(member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)))|subset(X4,X5))),inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[24])).
% fof(26, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:(((~(member(X6,X4))|member(X6,X5))|~(subset(X4,X5)))&((member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)|subset(X4,X5))&(~(member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5))|subset(X4,X5)))),inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[25])).
% cnf(28,plain,(subset(X1,X2)|member(esk1_2(X1,X2),X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[26])).
% fof(80, negated_conjecture,?[X2]:~(member(empty_set,power_set(X2))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[13])).
% fof(81, negated_conjecture,?[X3]:~(member(empty_set,power_set(X3))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[80])).
% fof(82, negated_conjecture,~(member(empty_set,power_set(esk4_0))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[81])).
% cnf(83,negated_conjecture,(~member(empty_set,power_set(esk4_0))),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[82])).
% cnf(87,negated_conjecture,(~subset(empty_set,esk4_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[83,20,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(96,plain,(subset(empty_set,X1)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[17,28,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(149,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[87,96,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(150,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[149,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(151,negated_conjecture,($false),150,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses                  : 66
% # ...of these trivial                : 0
% # ...subsumed                        : 0
% # ...remaining for further processing: 66
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 3
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed                  : 0
% # Backward-rewritten                 : 0
% # Generated clauses                  : 65
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 56
% # Contextual simplify-reflections    : 0
% # Paramodulations                    : 62
% # Factorizations                     : 0
% # Equation resolutions               : 3
% # Current number of processed clauses: 32
% #    Positive orientable unit clauses: 5
% #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% #    Negative unit clauses           : 2
% #    Non-unit-clauses                : 25
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 50
% # ...number of literals in the above : 119
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 26
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 26
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 7
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound  : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts        : 5
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes       : 0
% # Backwards rewriting index:    36 leaves,   1.47+/-0.763 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index:           13 leaves,   1.08+/-0.266 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index:           33 leaves,   1.30+/-0.577 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time              : 0.015 s
% # System time            : 0.004 s
% # Total time             : 0.019 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.10 CPU 0.17 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.10 CPU 0.17 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP28693/SET366+4.tptp
% 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------