TSTP Solution File: SET877+1 by SRASS---0.1
View Problem
- Process Solution
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------
% File : SRASS---0.1
% Problem : SET877+1 : TPTP v5.0.0. Released v3.2.0.
% 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 : Thu Dec 30 00:14:20 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/SystemOnTPTP1757/SET877+1.tptp
% Adding relevance values
% Extracting the conjecture
% Sorting axioms by relevance
% Looking for THM ... found
% SZS status THM for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP1757/SET877+1.tptp
% SZS output start Solution for /tmp/SystemOnTPTP1757/SET877+1.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 1855
% TreeLimitedRun: ----------------------------------------------------------
% PrfWatch: 0.00 CPU 0.00 WC
% # Preprocessing time : 0.011 s
% # Problem is unsatisfiable (or provable), constructing proof object
% # SZS status Theorem
% # SZS output start CNFRefutation.
% fof(1, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:set_intersection2(X1,X2)=set_intersection2(X2,X1),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', commutativity_k3_xboole_0)).
% fof(3, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(set_intersection2(X1,singleton(X2))=singleton(X2)=>in(X2,X1)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', l30_zfmisc_1)).
% fof(4, axiom,![X1]:![X2]:(X2=singleton(X1)<=>![X3]:(in(X3,X2)<=>X3=X1)),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', d1_tarski)).
% fof(8, conjecture,![X1]:![X2]:(set_intersection2(singleton(X1),singleton(X2))=singleton(X1)=>X1=X2),file('/tmp/SRASS.s.p', t18_zfmisc_1)).
% fof(9, negated_conjecture,~(![X1]:![X2]:(set_intersection2(singleton(X1),singleton(X2))=singleton(X1)=>X1=X2)),inference(assume_negation,[status(cth)],[8])).
% fof(12, plain,![X3]:![X4]:set_intersection2(X3,X4)=set_intersection2(X4,X3),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[1])).
% cnf(13,plain,(set_intersection2(X1,X2)=set_intersection2(X2,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[12])).
% fof(16, plain,![X1]:![X2]:(~(set_intersection2(X1,singleton(X2))=singleton(X2))|in(X2,X1)),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[3])).
% fof(17, plain,![X3]:![X4]:(~(set_intersection2(X3,singleton(X4))=singleton(X4))|in(X4,X3)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[16])).
% cnf(18,plain,(in(X1,X2)|set_intersection2(X2,singleton(X1))!=singleton(X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[17])).
% fof(19, plain,![X1]:![X2]:((~(X2=singleton(X1))|![X3]:((~(in(X3,X2))|X3=X1)&(~(X3=X1)|in(X3,X2))))&(?[X3]:((~(in(X3,X2))|~(X3=X1))&(in(X3,X2)|X3=X1))|X2=singleton(X1))),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[4])).
% fof(20, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(X5=singleton(X4))|![X6]:((~(in(X6,X5))|X6=X4)&(~(X6=X4)|in(X6,X5))))&(?[X7]:((~(in(X7,X5))|~(X7=X4))&(in(X7,X5)|X7=X4))|X5=singleton(X4))),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[19])).
% fof(21, plain,![X4]:![X5]:((~(X5=singleton(X4))|![X6]:((~(in(X6,X5))|X6=X4)&(~(X6=X4)|in(X6,X5))))&(((~(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5))|~(esk1_2(X4,X5)=X4))&(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)|esk1_2(X4,X5)=X4))|X5=singleton(X4))),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[20])).
% fof(22, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:((((~(in(X6,X5))|X6=X4)&(~(X6=X4)|in(X6,X5)))|~(X5=singleton(X4)))&(((~(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5))|~(esk1_2(X4,X5)=X4))&(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)|esk1_2(X4,X5)=X4))|X5=singleton(X4))),inference(shift_quantors,[status(thm)],[21])).
% fof(23, plain,![X4]:![X5]:![X6]:((((~(in(X6,X5))|X6=X4)|~(X5=singleton(X4)))&((~(X6=X4)|in(X6,X5))|~(X5=singleton(X4))))&(((~(in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5))|~(esk1_2(X4,X5)=X4))|X5=singleton(X4))&((in(esk1_2(X4,X5),X5)|esk1_2(X4,X5)=X4)|X5=singleton(X4)))),inference(distribute,[status(thm)],[22])).
% cnf(27,plain,(X3=X2|X1!=singleton(X2)|~in(X3,X1)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[23])).
% fof(37, negated_conjecture,?[X1]:?[X2]:(set_intersection2(singleton(X1),singleton(X2))=singleton(X1)&~(X1=X2)),inference(fof_nnf,[status(thm)],[9])).
% fof(38, negated_conjecture,?[X3]:?[X4]:(set_intersection2(singleton(X3),singleton(X4))=singleton(X3)&~(X3=X4)),inference(variable_rename,[status(thm)],[37])).
% fof(39, negated_conjecture,(set_intersection2(singleton(esk4_0),singleton(esk5_0))=singleton(esk4_0)&~(esk4_0=esk5_0)),inference(skolemize,[status(esa)],[38])).
% cnf(40,negated_conjecture,(esk4_0!=esk5_0),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[39])).
% cnf(41,negated_conjecture,(set_intersection2(singleton(esk4_0),singleton(esk5_0))=singleton(esk4_0)),inference(split_conjunct,[status(thm)],[39])).
% cnf(49,plain,(in(X1,X2)|set_intersection2(singleton(X1),X2)!=singleton(X1)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[18,13,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(69,negated_conjecture,(in(esk4_0,singleton(esk5_0))),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[49,41,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(74,negated_conjecture,(X1=esk4_0|singleton(X1)!=singleton(esk5_0)),inference(spm,[status(thm)],[27,69,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(75,negated_conjecture,(esk5_0=esk4_0),inference(er,[status(thm)],[74,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(76,negated_conjecture,($false),inference(sr,[status(thm)],[75,40,theory(equality)])).
% cnf(77,negated_conjecture,($false),76,['proof']).
% # SZS output end CNFRefutation
% # Processed clauses : 42
% # ...of these trivial : 0
% # ...subsumed : 5
% # ...remaining for further processing: 37
% # Other redundant clauses eliminated : 1
% # Clauses deleted for lack of memory : 0
% # Backward-subsumed : 0
% # Backward-rewritten : 0
% # Generated clauses : 31
% # ...of the previous two non-trivial : 25
% # Contextual simplify-reflections : 0
% # Paramodulations : 26
% # Factorizations : 0
% # Equation resolutions : 5
% # Current number of processed clauses: 24
% # Positive orientable unit clauses: 5
% # Positive unorientable unit clauses: 1
% # Negative unit clauses : 4
% # Non-unit-clauses : 14
% # Current number of unprocessed clauses: 7
% # ...number of literals in the above : 15
% # Clause-clause subsumption calls (NU) : 29
% # Rec. Clause-clause subsumption calls : 28
% # Unit Clause-clause subsumption calls : 3
% # Rewrite failures with RHS unbound : 0
% # Indexed BW rewrite attempts : 8
% # Indexed BW rewrite successes : 8
% # Backwards rewriting index: 22 leaves, 1.23+/-0.598 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-from index: 7 leaves, 1.29+/-0.700 terms/leaf
% # Paramod-into index: 21 leaves, 1.24+/-0.610 terms/leaf
% # -------------------------------------------------
% # User time : 0.010 s
% # System time : 0.003 s
% # Total time : 0.013 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/SystemOnTPTP1757/SET877+1.tptp
%
%------------------------------------------------------------------------------