TSTP Solution File: SET574+3 by SRASS---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : SET574+3 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm : none
% Format : tptp
% Command : SRASS -q2 -a 0 10 10 10 -i3 -n60 %s
% Computer : art06.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 23:10:31 EST 2010
% Result : Theorem 0.87s
% Output : Solution 0.87s
% 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/SystemOnTPTP27420/SET574+3.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ... found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP27420/SET574+3.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP27420/SET574+3.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 27516
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.00 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.010 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(1, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(intersect(X1,X2)<=>?[X3]:(member(X3,X1)&member(X3,X2))),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', intersect_defn)).
% fof(3, conjecture,![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:((member(X1,X2)&member(X1,X3))=>intersect(X2,X3)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', prove_th13)).
% fof(4, negated_conjecture,~(![X1]:![X2]:![X3]:((member(X1,X2)&member(X1,X3))=>intersect(X2,X3))),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[3])).
% fof(5, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((~(intersect(X1,X2))|?[X3]:(member(X3,X1)&member(X3,X2)))&(![X3]:(~(member(X3,X1))|~(member(X3,X2)))|intersect(X1,X2))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[1])).
% fof(6, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(intersect(X4,X5))|?[X6]:(member(X6,X4)&member(X6,X5)))&(![X7]:(~(member(X7,X4))|~(member(X7,X5)))|intersect(X4,X5))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[5])).
% fof(7, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(intersect(X4,X5))|(member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)&member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)))&(![X7]:(~(member(X7,X4))|~(member(X7,X5)))|intersect(X4,X5))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[6])).
% fof(8, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X7]:(((~(member(X7,X4))|~(member(X7,X5)))|intersect(X4,X5))&(~(intersect(X4,X5))|(member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)&member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)))),inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[7])).
% fof(9, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X7]:(((~(member(X7,X4))|~(member(X7,X5)))|intersect(X4,X5))&((member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X4)|~(intersect(X4,X5)))&(member(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)|~(intersect(X4,X5))))),inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[8])).
% cnf(12,plain,(intersect(X1,X2)|~member(X3,X2)|~member(X3,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[9])).
% fof(16, negated_conjecture,?[X1]:?[X2]:?[X3]:((member(X1,X2)&member(X1,X3))&~(intersect(X2,X3))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[4])).
% fof(17, negated_conjecture,?[X4]:?[X5]:?[X6]:((member(X4,X5)&member(X4,X6))&~(intersect(X5,X6))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[16])).
% fof(18, negated_conjecture,((member(esk2_0,esk3_0)&member(esk2_0,esk4_0))&~(intersect(esk3_0,esk4_0))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[17])).
% cnf(19,negated_conjecture,(~intersect(esk3_0,esk4_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[18])).
% cnf(20,negated_conjecture,(member(esk2_0,esk4_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[18])).
% cnf(21,negated_conjecture,(member(esk2_0,esk3_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[18])).
% cnf(22,negated_conjecture,(intersect(X1,esk4_0)|~member(esk2_0,X1)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[12,20,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(26,negated_conjecture,(~member(esk2_0,esk3_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[19,22,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(28,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(rw,[status(thm)],[26,21,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(29,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(cn,[status(thm)],[28,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(30,negated_conjecture,($false),29,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 15
% # ...of these trivial : 0
% # ...subsumed : 0
% # ...remaining for further processing: 15
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 0
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 0
% # Generated clauses : 6
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 4
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% # Paramodulations : 6
% # Factorizations : 0
% # Equation resolutions : 0
% # Current number of processed clauses: 8
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 2
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% # Negative unit clauses : 1
% # Non-unit-clauses : 5
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 3
% # ...number of literals in the above : 8
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 4
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 0
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 0
% # Backwards rewriting index: 13 leaves, 1.23+/-0.421 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 4 leaves, 1.25+/-0.433 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 11 leaves, 1.09+/-0.287 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.008 s
% # System time : 0.003 s
% # Total time : 0.011 s
% # Maximum resident set size: 0 pages
% PrfWatch: 0.08 CPU 0.17 WC
% FINAL PrfWatch: 0.08 CPU 0.17 WC
% SZS output end Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP27420/SET574+3.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------