TSTP Solution File: SET653+3 by SOS---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : SOS---2.0
% Problem  : SET653+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : sos-script %s

% Computer : n020.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 05:19:50 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 1.82s 2.00s
% Output   : Refutation 1.82s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : -

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----WARNING: Could not form TPTP format derivation
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.07/0.12  % Problem  : SET653+3 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.07/0.13  % Command  : sos-script %s
% 0.14/0.34  % Computer : n020.cluster.edu
% 0.14/0.34  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.14/0.34  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.14/0.34  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.14/0.34  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.14/0.34  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.14/0.34  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.14/0.34  % DateTime : Sun Jul 10 23:07:13 EDT 2022
% 0.14/0.34  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.14/0.36  ----- Otter 3.2, August 2001 -----
% 0.14/0.36  The process was started by sandbox on n020.cluster.edu,
% 0.14/0.36  Sun Jul 10 23:07:13 2022
% 0.14/0.36  The command was "./sos".  The process ID is 27061.
% 0.14/0.36  
% 0.14/0.36  set(prolog_style_variables).
% 0.14/0.36  set(auto).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(auto1).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(process_input).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: clear(print_kept).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: clear(print_new_demod).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: clear(print_back_demod).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: clear(print_back_sub).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(control_memory).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: assign(max_mem, 12000).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: assign(pick_given_ratio, 4).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: assign(stats_level, 1).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: assign(pick_semantic_ratio, 3).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: assign(sos_limit, 5000).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: assign(max_weight, 60).
% 0.14/0.36  clear(print_given).
% 0.14/0.36  
% 0.14/0.36  formula_list(usable).
% 0.14/0.36  
% 0.14/0.36  SCAN INPUT: prop=0, horn=0, equality=1, symmetry=0, max_lits=6.
% 0.14/0.36  
% 0.14/0.36  This ia a non-Horn set with equality.  The strategy will be
% 0.14/0.36  Knuth-Bendix, ordered hyper_res, ur_res, factoring, and
% 0.14/0.36  unit deletion, with positive clauses in sos and nonpositive
% 0.14/0.36  clauses in usable.
% 0.14/0.36  
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(knuth_bendix).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(para_from).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(para_into).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: clear(para_from_right).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: clear(para_into_right).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(para_from_vars).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(eq_units_both_ways).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(dynamic_demod_all).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(dynamic_demod).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(order_eq).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(back_demod).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(lrpo).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(hyper_res).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(unit_deletion).
% 0.14/0.36     dependent: set(factor).
% 0.14/0.36  
% 0.14/0.36  ------------> process usable:
% 0.14/0.36  
% 0.14/0.36  ------------> process sos:
% 0.14/0.36    Following clause subsumed by 72 during input processing: 0 [] {-} ilf_type($c4,set_type).
% 0.14/0.36    Following clause subsumed by 72 during input processing: 0 [] {-} ilf_type($c3,set_type).
% 0.14/0.36    Following clause subsumed by 72 during input processing: 0 [] {-} ilf_type($c2,set_type).
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 70.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 64.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 63.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 57.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 51.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 40.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 35.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 32.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 31.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 29.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 24.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 20.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 14.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 13.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 12.
% 0.14/0.36  72 back subsumes 9.
% 0.14/0.36    Following clause subsumed by 75 during input processing: 0 [copy,75,flip.1] {-} A=A.
% 0.14/0.36  
% 0.14/0.36  ======= end of input processing =======
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  Model 1 (0.00 seconds, 0 Inserts)
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  Stopped by limit on number of solutions
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  -------------- Softie stats --------------
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  UPDATE_STOP: 300
% 0.58/0.74  SFINDER_TIME_LIMIT: 2
% 0.58/0.74  SHORT_CLAUSE_CUTOFF: 4
% 0.58/0.74  number of clauses in intial UL: 54
% 0.58/0.74  number of clauses initially in problem: 58
% 0.58/0.74  percentage of clauses intially in UL: 93
% 0.58/0.74  percentage of distinct symbols occuring in initial UL: 96
% 0.58/0.74  percent of all initial clauses that are short: 98
% 0.58/0.74  absolute distinct symbol count: 28
% 0.58/0.74     distinct predicate count: 6
% 0.58/0.74     distinct function count: 17
% 0.58/0.74     distinct constant count: 5
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  ---------- no more Softie stats ----------
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 0.58/0.74  
% 0.58/0.74  =========== start of search ===========
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  -------- PROOF -------- 
% 1.82/2.00  % SZS status Theorem
% 1.82/2.00  % SZS output start Refutation
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 2 [ 2 1 7251 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 3 [ 3 0 183 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 4 [ 3 1 637 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 5 [ 1 3 37309 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 6 [ 10 1 936 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 7 [ 5 1 894 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 8 [ 13 0 423 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Stopped by limit on insertions
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 9 [ 10 0 1729 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  ----> UNIT CONFLICT at   1.62 sec ----> 177 [binary,176.1,41.1] {+} $F.
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Length of proof is 5.  Level of proof is 3.
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  ---------------- PROOF ----------------
% 1.82/2.00  % SZS status Theorem
% 1.82/2.00  % SZS output start Refutation
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  1 [] {+} -ilf_type(A,set_type)| -ilf_type(B,set_type)| -ilf_type(C,set_type)| -subset(A,B)| -subset(B,C)|subset(A,C).
% 1.82/2.00  2 [] {+} -ilf_type(A,set_type)| -ilf_type(B,set_type)| -ilf_type(C,relation_type(A,B))|subset(domain_of(C),A).
% 1.82/2.00  4 [] {+} -ilf_type(A,set_type)| -ilf_type(B,set_type)| -ilf_type(C,set_type)| -ilf_type(D,relation_type(A,C))| -subset(domain_of(D),B)|ilf_type(D,relation_type(B,C)).
% 1.82/2.00  18 [] {+} -ilf_type(A,set_type)|subset(A,A).
% 1.82/2.00  41 [] {+} -ilf_type($c1,relation_type($c3,$c2)).
% 1.82/2.00  72 [] {-} ilf_type(A,set_type).
% 1.82/2.00  73 [] {-} ilf_type($c1,relation_type($c4,$c2)).
% 1.82/2.00  74 [] {-} subset($c4,$c3).
% 1.82/2.00  82 [hyper,72,18] {+} subset(A,A).
% 1.82/2.00  87 [hyper,73,4,72,72,72,82] {-} ilf_type($c1,relation_type(domain_of($c1),$c2)).
% 1.82/2.00  89 [hyper,73,2,72,72] {+} subset(domain_of($c1),$c4).
% 1.82/2.00  99 [hyper,89,1,72,72,72,74] {+} subset(domain_of($c1),$c3).
% 1.82/2.00  176 [hyper,99,4,72,72,72,87] {-} ilf_type($c1,relation_type($c3,$c2)).
% 1.82/2.00  177 [binary,176.1,41.1] {+} $F.
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  % SZS output end Refutation
% 1.82/2.00  ------------ end of proof -------------
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Search stopped by max_proofs option.
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  ============ end of search ============
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  ----------- soft-scott stats ----------
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  true clauses given           4      (17.4%)
% 1.82/2.00  false clauses given         19
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00        FALSE     TRUE
% 1.82/2.00     6  0         4
% 1.82/2.00     7  2         6
% 1.82/2.00     8  4         3
% 1.82/2.00     9  5         5
% 1.82/2.00    10  2         1
% 1.82/2.00    11  4         3
% 1.82/2.00    12  1         1
% 1.82/2.00    13  2         0
% 1.82/2.00    14  2         0
% 1.82/2.00    15  4         1
% 1.82/2.00    16  1         0
% 1.82/2.00    17  0         1
% 1.82/2.00    18  1         0
% 1.82/2.00    19  1         0
% 1.82/2.00    20  1         0
% 1.82/2.00    22  0         1
% 1.82/2.00    23  0         1
% 1.82/2.00    37  1         0
% 1.82/2.00  tot:  31        27      (46.6% true)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Model 9 [ 10 0 1729 ] (0.00 seconds, 250000 Inserts)
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  That finishes the proof of the theorem.
% 1.82/2.00  
% 1.82/2.00  Process 27061 finished Sun Jul 10 23:07:14 2022
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------