TSTP Solution File: SET705+4 by ET---2.0

View Problem - Process Solution

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File     : ET---2.0
% Problem  : SET705+4 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% Transfm  : none
% Format   : tptp:raw
% Command  : run_ET %s %d

% Computer : n015.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 00:53:15 EDT 2022

% Result   : Theorem 0.21s 1.40s
% Output   : CNFRefutation 0.21s
% Verified : 
% SZS Type : Refutation
%            Derivation depth      :    5
%            Number of leaves      :    3
% Syntax   : Number of formulae    :   14 (   7 unt;   0 def)
%            Number of atoms       :   29 (   0 equ)
%            Maximal formula atoms :    7 (   2 avg)
%            Number of connectives :   25 (  10   ~;   9   |;   3   &)
%                                         (   2 <=>;   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;   1 con; 0-2 aty)
%            Number of variables   :   24 (   4 sgn  16   !;   0   ?)

% Comments : 
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
fof(subset,axiom,
    ! [X1,X2] :
      ( subset(X1,X2)
    <=> ! [X3] :
          ( member(X3,X1)
         => member(X3,X2) ) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET006+0.ax',subset) ).

fof(thI48,conjecture,
    ! [X1] : member(X1,power_set(X1)),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/solver/bin/../tmp/theBenchmark.p.mepo_128.in',thI48) ).

fof(power_set,axiom,
    ! [X3,X1] :
      ( member(X3,power_set(X1))
    <=> subset(X3,X1) ),
    file('/export/starexec/sandbox/benchmark/Axioms/SET006+0.ax',power_set) ).

fof(c_0_3,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])])])])])])]) ).

fof(c_0_4,negated_conjecture,
    ~ ! [X1] : member(X1,power_set(X1)),
    inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[thI48]) ).

fof(c_0_5,plain,
    ! [X4,X5,X4,X5] :
      ( ( ~ member(X4,power_set(X5))
        | subset(X4,X5) )
      & ( ~ subset(X4,X5)
        | member(X4,power_set(X5)) ) ),
    inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[power_set])])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_6,plain,
    ( subset(X1,X2)
    | ~ member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

cnf(c_0_7,plain,
    ( subset(X1,X2)
    | member(esk2_2(X1,X2),X1) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_3]) ).

fof(c_0_8,negated_conjecture,
    ~ member(esk1_0,power_set(esk1_0)),
    inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[c_0_4])])]) ).

cnf(c_0_9,plain,
    ( member(X1,power_set(X2))
    | ~ subset(X1,X2) ),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_5]) ).

cnf(c_0_10,plain,
    subset(X1,X1),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_6,c_0_7]) ).

cnf(c_0_11,negated_conjecture,
    ~ member(esk1_0,power_set(esk1_0)),
    inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[c_0_8]) ).

cnf(c_0_12,plain,
    member(X1,power_set(X1)),
    inference(spm,[status(thm)],[c_0_9,c_0_10]) ).

cnf(c_0_13,negated_conjecture,
    $false,
    inference(cn,[status(thm)],[inference(rw,[status(thm)],[c_0_11,c_0_12])]),
    [proof] ).

%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
%----ORIGINAL SYSTEM OUTPUT
% 0.10/0.11  % Problem  : SET705+4 : TPTP v8.1.0. Released v2.2.0.
% 0.10/0.12  % Command  : run_ET %s %d
% 0.12/0.33  % Computer : n015.cluster.edu
% 0.12/0.33  % Model    : x86_64 x86_64
% 0.12/0.33  % CPU      : Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2620 v4 @ 2.10GHz
% 0.12/0.33  % Memory   : 8042.1875MB
% 0.12/0.33  % OS       : Linux 3.10.0-693.el7.x86_64
% 0.12/0.33  % CPULimit : 300
% 0.12/0.33  % WCLimit  : 600
% 0.12/0.33  % DateTime : Sat Jul  9 23:17:52 EDT 2022
% 0.12/0.33  % CPUTime  : 
% 0.21/1.40  # Running protocol protocol_eprover_4a02c828a8cc55752123edbcc1ad40e453c11447 for 23 seconds:
% 0.21/1.40  # SinE strategy is GSinE(CountFormulas,hypos,1.4,,04,100,1.0)
% 0.21/1.40  # Preprocessing time       : 0.014 s
% 0.21/1.40  
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof found!
% 0.21/1.40  # SZS status Theorem
% 0.21/1.40  # SZS output start CNFRefutation
% See solution above
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object total steps             : 14
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object clause steps            : 7
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object formula steps           : 7
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object conjectures             : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object clause conjectures      : 2
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object formula conjectures     : 3
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object initial clauses used    : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object initial formulas used   : 3
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object generating inferences   : 2
% 0.21/1.40  # Proof object simplifying inferences  : 2
% 0.21/1.40  # Training examples: 0 positive, 0 negative
% 0.21/1.40  # Parsed axioms                        : 12
% 0.21/1.40  # Removed by relevancy pruning/SinE    : 9
% 0.21/1.40  # Initial clauses                      : 6
% 0.21/1.40  # Removed in clause preprocessing      : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Initial clauses in saturation        : 6
% 0.21/1.40  # Processed clauses                    : 8
% 0.21/1.40  # ...of these trivial                  : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # ...subsumed                          : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # ...remaining for further processing  : 8
% 0.21/1.40  # Other redundant clauses eliminated   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Clauses deleted for lack of memory   : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Backward-subsumed                    : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Backward-rewritten                   : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Generated clauses                    : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # ...of the previous two non-trivial   : 3
% 0.21/1.40  # Contextual simplify-reflections      : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Paramodulations                      : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # Factorizations                       : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Equation resolutions                 : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of processed clauses  : 7
% 0.21/1.40  #    Positive orientable unit clauses  : 2
% 0.21/1.40  #    Positive unorientable unit clauses: 0
% 0.21/1.40  #    Negative unit clauses             : 0
% 0.21/1.40  #    Non-unit-clauses                  : 5
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 1
% 0.21/1.40  # ...number of literals in the above   : 2
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of archived formulas  : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Current number of archived clauses   : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Non-unit clause-clause subsumptions  : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound    : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # BW rewrite match attempts            : 4
% 0.21/1.40  # BW rewrite match successes           : 1
% 0.21/1.40  # Condensation attempts                : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Condensation successes               : 0
% 0.21/1.40  # Termbank termtop insertions          : 473
% 0.21/1.40  
% 0.21/1.40  # -------------------------------------------------
% 0.21/1.40  # User time                : 0.010 s
% 0.21/1.40  # System time              : 0.004 s
% 0.21/1.40  # Total time               : 0.014 s
% 0.21/1.40  # Maximum resident set size: 2816 pages
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------